{"title":"A Small Alpine Form: Studies in Nabokov's Short Fiction (review)","authors":"Maxim D. Shrayer","doi":"10.1353/nab.2011.0077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"perspectives on Nabokov's works. But one can't help but wonder if they belong in an introductory study, aimed in part at giving new readers an entree into the mainstream understanding of the novelist and his novels. Third, and finally, Sharpe, like virtually all other Nabokovian commentators, is unable to resist the temptation to occasionally imitate the style of his subject. Much of the style of Vladimir Nabokov is clear and appropriate, and Sharpe is a healthy long way from the pseudo-Nabokovianisms of some of his predecessors. Still, at times, one wants to suggest leaving Nabokov's style to Nabokov. For example, it really isn't necessary to begin the study with a sentence about Nabokov's death, and to conclude the book with one on his birth. This was clever when Nabokov did it in his biography of Gogol, a bit cute the first time or two a critic tried it, and now just seems unnecessary. Or, when discussing John Shade's physical appearance, Professor Sharpe probably did not need to add the following footnote (cited in its entirety: \"I am struck by the similarity between this and the tribute of a recent biographer-obituarist recalling his first meeting with his future subject: 'Even then he was not slim, yet he carried about him an atmosphere of thinness' ( 7he Independent, Thursday 4 April 1991, p. 3)\" (91). Or this item from the Bibliography: \"There is much more written on Nabokov than is worth reading (with Kinbotian modesty I leave my reader to pass appropriate judgement on this book)...\" (112). These games are fun; most of us would not be the partisans of Nabokov if we did not enjoy them; still, the place for Kinbote is in Pale Fire, not in criticism of Pale Fire: the temptation should be resisted a bit more stoutly than Professor Sharpe manages. These are relatively small quibbles, indeed, and they do little to mar a useful book. Tony Sharpe's Vladimir Nabokov is a study which will be an appropriate door and eye opener for the beginner, and a stimulating discussion for the more experienced. To have accomplished either of these objectives is admirable, to have achieved both is impressive.","PeriodicalId":110136,"journal":{"name":"Nabokov Studies","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nabokov Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/nab.2011.0077","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
perspectives on Nabokov's works. But one can't help but wonder if they belong in an introductory study, aimed in part at giving new readers an entree into the mainstream understanding of the novelist and his novels. Third, and finally, Sharpe, like virtually all other Nabokovian commentators, is unable to resist the temptation to occasionally imitate the style of his subject. Much of the style of Vladimir Nabokov is clear and appropriate, and Sharpe is a healthy long way from the pseudo-Nabokovianisms of some of his predecessors. Still, at times, one wants to suggest leaving Nabokov's style to Nabokov. For example, it really isn't necessary to begin the study with a sentence about Nabokov's death, and to conclude the book with one on his birth. This was clever when Nabokov did it in his biography of Gogol, a bit cute the first time or two a critic tried it, and now just seems unnecessary. Or, when discussing John Shade's physical appearance, Professor Sharpe probably did not need to add the following footnote (cited in its entirety: "I am struck by the similarity between this and the tribute of a recent biographer-obituarist recalling his first meeting with his future subject: 'Even then he was not slim, yet he carried about him an atmosphere of thinness' ( 7he Independent, Thursday 4 April 1991, p. 3)" (91). Or this item from the Bibliography: "There is much more written on Nabokov than is worth reading (with Kinbotian modesty I leave my reader to pass appropriate judgement on this book)..." (112). These games are fun; most of us would not be the partisans of Nabokov if we did not enjoy them; still, the place for Kinbote is in Pale Fire, not in criticism of Pale Fire: the temptation should be resisted a bit more stoutly than Professor Sharpe manages. These are relatively small quibbles, indeed, and they do little to mar a useful book. Tony Sharpe's Vladimir Nabokov is a study which will be an appropriate door and eye opener for the beginner, and a stimulating discussion for the more experienced. To have accomplished either of these objectives is admirable, to have achieved both is impressive.