Re: great minds think alike
Matthew_Stevenson@baylor.edu
Thu, 17 Sep 1998 20:15:15 -0500
i must admit now that i am fairly ignorant of nabokov's work, and that despair
is the first i've read by him (and i've not yet finished that, so no fair
spoiling anything for me). perhaps that is why i was struck by that bit in
the introduction, i just hadn't expected a lot of similarities between this
russian guy i'd never read and an american of whom i've read a great deal.
and i think Jim may have misinterpretted what nabokov was saying in that
section of the introduction. Jim seems to have taken it to mean that nabokov
forbade anyone from interpreting the novel in any way he had not
predetermined. (Jim, please correct me if i'm wrong, as i'm sure you will;))
i, however, take it to mean that nabokov's intent in writing the story was not
to illuminate the world with some bit of esoteric wisdom attainable only by
some Freudian with a knowledge of German Impressionist writers. he's saying
that writing is, in the end, an entirely selfish act. the fact that others
may benefit in some way from this act do not change the motivation in the
slightest. and i feel that salinger would agree with this sentiment. that's
why we can all accept that salinger has continued to write without
publishing--his writing is and always has been selfish. we the Freudian
public wish it were otherwise, but alas, it is not ours to decide.
matt