Was Vladimir Nabokov A Genius?
Education
Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov, also known by the pen name Vladimir Sirin, was a Russian-American novelist, poet, translator, and entomologist.
Shade, Kinbote and Gradus in “Pale Fire”
Nabokov depicted three characters in his novel “pale fire”:
- American poet Shade John.
- Kinbote, a professor who regarded himself as the king Zembla.
- And a Zemblan assassin named Gradus.
However, their relationship and their representation are hidden under the unreliable narration of narrator Kinbote and the complex relation between Shade’s poem and Kinbote’s comment.
This passage will firstly discuss the four layers of the novel: Shade’s poem, Kinbote’s story of Zembla, the biography of Shade written by Kinbote and the index of the book, which use rational perspective to summarize every term, which may unreliable and contradicted, without negate them.
Nabokov in 1973
Secondly, according to the part in which Kinbote contradicts himself, this passage will show why the narration of Kinbote is unreliable and how to find the truth under his unreliable narration.
Thirdly, the relation of these three characters will be unveil and what they represent will be discussed:
- Shade represents the old-style literature which focus on the meaning of literature and give a definite meaning to readers.
- Kinbote represents the postmodern literature which deconstruct existed order.
- And Gradus represent the readers who lingering between different illustration of story and finally choose to deconstruct the order.
In the end, the relation between old literature, new literature and reader is an intertextuality of the relation of sun, sea and moon in Shakespeare’s work, the origin of the name of the book.
Firstly, “Pale Fire” includes four narrations in a new form of novel.
The most ostensible layer of narration is the poem of Shade:
When the separate parts are assembled, according to the manufacturer’s directions, and fitted together with the help of clues and cross-references. Which must be hunted down as in a paper-chase, a novel on several levels is revealed, and these “levels” are not the customary “levels of meaning” of modernist criticism but planes in a fictive space(McCarthy,1962).
In that poem, Shade uses his poem as a biography to discuss his attitude to life, beauty and death. The second layer of the narration is the comment of the poem written by Kinbote. In the comment, Kinbote didn’t follow the original text of the poem.
On the other hand, he reconstructs a story of his own. In his comment, he depicts himself as the king of Zembla who escapes from his kingdom and is threatened by an assassin, Gradus. In the last comment of Kinbote, he attributes the death of Shade to assassin Gradus, who want to murder Kinbote instead. The third layer of narration becomes the biography of Shade written by Kinbote. Unlike the poem Shade which mainly focuses on the value and experience of himself. The biography written by Kinbote focuses on the social relation and characteristics of Shade. In this part of the story, we can have a glance at the characteristics of Kinbote and Shade.
Shade is an old style gentleman in America.
He is well known as a professor and poet and his life follows the mainstream: he is heterosexual, rooted and focused. Kinbote, on the other hand, is opposed by the mainstream of community: he is rootless, homosexual, lonely and universally disliked by others. After the end of the commentary. The novel enters the fourth narrative frame. The index part. The outer narrator finally enters the inner part of the poem.
And the narrative focus changes from the limited story narrated by bystanders to the outer narrator who is fully informed.
The indexers have combed, researched and explained the people, places and events mentioned in Shade’s long poems in alphabetical order. The index of the novel serves as a summary. The narrator uses a rational and emotionless tone to summarize the life and features of characteristic in a one-by-one and separate sequence without expressing the understanding of these characters.
However, just as what Nabokov did in many of his novels, the narrator of the story is unreliable.
In the narration of Kinbote, he contradicts himself in many ways. Firstly, Kinbote claims that he got several chapters of variants from Shade, and these variants can help the readers understand more about the poem. However, Kinbote pointed out that the poem itself is a definite draft.
Actually, it turns out to be beneficially accurate when you once plunge and compel yourself to open your eyes in the limpid depth under its confused surface. It contains not one graph line, not one doubtful reading. (Pale Fire,14)
As a result, when Kinbote adds such “variants” into the comment, he contradicts his claim that the poem has neither gray lines nor doubtful readings. In addition, some of such “variants” are irrational and not likely written by Shade, a focused and disciplined poet.
Moreover, in the left margin, and parallel to it:
“In the Middle Ages an hour was equal to 480 ounces of fine sand or 22560 atoms.”(Pale Fire,117)
The Rozhdestveno estate 16-year-old Nabokov inherited from his maternal uncle. Nabokov possessed it for less than a year before losing it in the October Revolution.
It is obvious that the term “atom” was not defined in the middle ages. Shade, as a serious poet, has no reason to add that mistaken note which has no help to understanding. That is not the only example in which the variant of Kinbote is unreliable.
I wish to say something about an earlier note (to line 12). Conscience and scholarship have debated the question. And I now think that the two lines given in that note are distorted and tainted by wistful thinking. It is the only time in the course of the writing of these difficult comments that I have tarried, in my distress and disappointment, on the brink of falsification. (Pale Fire, 227)
Kinbote admits that he included some misinterpretation of the poem of Shade. As a result, we can conclude that the story of Zembla becomes totally fabricated by Kinbote. And has no relation to the work of Shade. As a result, there is no clear and definite relation between the work of Kinbote and Shade. The poem of the Shade only represents the life and value of Shade and the story of Zembla is totally the work of Kinbote. The only possibility to organize the different layers of the work is the relationship between Shade and Kinbote, and the summary in the index. In the following passage, the relationship between Kinbote, Shade and reader and why such relation matters will be discussed.
There is a noticeable incidence at the beginning of the index.
The capital letters G, K, S (which see) stand for the three main characters in this work (Pale Fire, 304).
Dartmouth College President Sian Beilock. Former Barnard College President. On How To Succeed!
It is obvious that Shade and Kinbote, as two narrators of the novel, serve as two of three main characters of the novel. However, Gradus, as a story character fabricated by Kinbote, is placed at the same level of narrators. It seems that Gradus not only serves as the role of story character. However, also has a representation or allusion. Which can serve as the counterpart of the narrator. Since Gradus obviously cannot serve as the third narrator, the following assumption can be reasonable:
Gradus represents the reader who uses his own understanding of the novel to complete the ambiguous part of the original novel.
Before discussing the representation of Gradus, the features and representations of Shade and Kinbote should be discussed. Firstly, in the perspective of narration, Shade is much more reliable than Kinbote. He articulated his value and idea to death without ambiguity. Also, the poem “Pale Fire” is his independent work and no content of Zembla is included in his poem. Finally, the work of Shade continues and generally follows the sequence of time. Kinbote, on the other hand, serves as an unreliable narrator in the novel. His work splits into different pieces of commentary and is ambiguous in many places. Secondly, his work can’t exist independently. The story of Zembla only exists in the intentionally misread in the comment of the poem “Pale Fire”. In addition, Kinbote himself is sometimes considered as the paradise on Shade.
I was to learn later that when alluding to me in the public she used to call me:
“an elephantine tick; a king-size botfly, a macaco worm; the monstrous parasite of a genius.”(Pale Fire,171)
As a result, Kinbote highly relies on Shade and he can only publish his Zembla story in the comment of Shade’s Poem. To analyze their styles in writing and the features of them, Shade represents the traditional literature which gives the work a specific and clear meaning and Kinbote represents the Postmodern literature which deconstruct the traditional forms of fiction, poetry, drama and even “narrative” itself. As a result, Kinbote and Shade represent two styles of literature which contradict each other.
The first reason why Gradus represents the role of readers is that Gradus is the counterpart of the narrator. And readers construct the story in Nabokov’s novel. Nabokov rejected the idea that the purpose of literature was to reflect realistically the life of society. He thinks all the art of behavior from the start to prepare the stage has been in the creation, the art of writing is to all the world as a potential novel to observe things, writing and writing purpose is not to teach the reader to understand the real world, but to allow readers to actively to find and create the meaning of the text through reading.
The novel “pale fire” is also ambiguous due to the contradiction between different layers of narration.
So, readers are free to define the part which didn’t state clearly in the novel and choose to believe Kinbote or Shade when they contradict each other. As a result, readers have the capacity to serve the role of the narrator and be the counterpart of two existing narrators in the novel. However, proving the reader serves as the narrator is only a necessary and not sufficient condition. Showing Gradus as a reader requires more work.
Secondly, the existence and the behavior of Gradus in the last comment of Kinbote is also worth analyzing. Gradus didn’t appear together with Kinbote and Shade in the comment from line 1 to 999 though the distance between them is getting closer with time passes. Gradus appears with Kinbote and Shade only in the comment 1000. Which is not included in Shade’s work. In other words, Gradus will no longer be a fabricated character and interact with the narrator if and only if the readers trust the line 1000 exists trust the story of Kinbote.
And the behavior which Gradus killed Shade. Is an allusion of readers’ deconstruction to the meaning of literature.
If readers choose to believe the narration of Shade, the end of the story of Zembla will no longer be the death of Shade since such an ending is meaningless to a traditional novel. Or the story of Zembla will no longer exist, which is the illusion that the reader is no longer being the part of the novel. Since only readers has the right to choose or negate one style of narration in “Pale fire”, and such a choice to choose the narration will affect the existence and behavior of Gradus, Gradus represent the role of readers who serve as the one of the narrators with their own understanding of novel.
The author’s grandfather Dmitry Nabokov, Justice Minister under Tsar Alexander II
When the role of Gradus is clear, the relation between these three characters can become analyzed. Shade negates the existence of Gradus and the traditional literature gives definite meaning to work and does not allow readers to narrate the story in most cases. Kinbote deconstructed the existing literature and order and relied on the thing deconstructed by him.
Such an analysis of relationship between characters is reasonable because it can illustrate the origin of the title of the novel: “Pale Fire”. Here is the original text of Shakespeare’s “Timon of Athens”.
The sun’s a thief, and with his great attraction
Robs the vast sea; the moon’s an arrant thief,
And her pale fire she snatches from the sun;
The sea’s a thief, whose liquid surge resolves (Act4, scene3)
Although Shakespeare discussed multiple kinds of thief in his work, the sun, moon and sea shows a triangular relationship between each other. Also, in the Shade’s English translation of the Zemblan translation of Shakespeare’s work, only sun, moon and sea are included. As a result, the moon, sun and sea play an important role in the title “Pale Fire”. Since the number of “thief” is three and we have three narrators, they both interact with each other. It is possible to assume that the sun, moon and sea represent Shade, Kinbote and readers.
The moon doesn’t emanate light and its light is from the sun, which is the metaphor of the fact Kinbote relies on Shade’s poem and publishes his own work in the comment of Shade’s poem. The sun steals from the sea and the moon is stolen by the sea. It is the metaphor of the active and passive attitude of the author to the meaning of the novel. Traditional literature states the meaning of the novel and postmodern literature lets readers to find the meaning of the novel.
As a result, the title of the “Pale Fire” may become a question to the postmodern literature:
The deconstruction of literature relies on the literature being constructed and cannot independently exist.
Furthermore, the problem becomes posted in the novel by the question and irony to Kinbote and his paradise relation with Shade. Kinbote himself claims that he was envied by the whole academic suburbia due to his friendship with Shade.
The author’s father, V. D. Nabokov, in his World War I officer’s uniform, 1914
However, Kinbote chose to lie to himself to escape from such irony and failed to face the fact that his work is not independent in the novel. Kinbote ignores the real relationship with Shade and deludes himself into claiming that his relationship with Shade has surpassed everyone else’s and becomes an everlasting and precious friendship. Shade’s gruff attitude toward him, which Kinbote explains as “driven by inner dignity,” adds to the greatness and value of their friendship Others’ parasitic attacks on Shade are interpreted by Kinbote as jealousy. The ironic display of the narrator’s self-consciousness fully reflects the implied author’s misidentification with his values: it is terrible to be thrown to the edge of mainstream culture, but it is impossible and even more pathetic to try to return to the center by parasitizing on mainstream culture.
Nabokov didn’t give the answer to the question in the novel directly.
However, we can have a glance at the attitude of Nabokov at the end of the comment:
But whatever happens, wherever the scene is laid, somebody, somewhere, will quietly set out. Somebody has already set out. Somebody still rather far away is buying a ticket, is boarding a bus, a ship, a plane, has landed, is walking toward a million photographers, and presently he will ring at my door—-a bigger, more respectable, more competent Gradus.(Pale Fire, 301)
The new Gradus, which is much better than the old one, represents the new readers in the future. The new reader is equipped with new knowledge and new forms of literature. Such a new form and knowledge of new readers will help them to replace the literature form of Nabokov. And solve the problem. In other words, Nabokov may not have an idea to solve the problem. But he is confident that the people in future can solve the problem. By either making deconstruction on non-exist literature form or simply replacing the postmodern style of writing.
The grave of the Nabokovs. At Cimetière de Clarens near Montreux, Switzerland
After analyzing the role of three narrators: Shade, readers and Kinbote. There is still one question lingering: why did Nabokov divide the narrator into three characters? According to postmodern writers, texts and narrators can be uncertain. Writing is nothing but a symbolic process of introspection, that is, a kind of information indicating oneself. Meaning comes from the reader, and writing is just a game of language.
As a result, Nabokov may want to offer a puzzle to the readers and make readers get pleasure in exploring the different layers of narration. It can be seen that the disappearance of the identity of the narrator and the unreliability of narration are the concentrated embodiment of Nabokov’s aesthetic thoughts of “novel is fiction”, “novel is a game” and “art for art’s sake”.
In conclusion, the role of the three main characters of “Pale Fire” is important since the narration of the Kinbote is unreliable so there remains ambiguity in the plot. Shade represents the old-style literature which focus on the meaning of literature and give a definite meaning to readers. Kinbote represents the postmodern literature which deconstruct existing order. And Gradus represents the readers who linger between different illustrations of story and finally choose to deconstruct the order. And such a relation becomes proved by Shakespeare’s work about sun, moon and sea. Which is the origin of the title of “Pale Fire”. The master skill to hide the illusion of character under fragment. And unreliable narration shows Nabokov has a special understanding of the role between narrator and reader. Which allows readers to search for the indefinite purpose of a novel, which makes his novels a masterpiece.
Written by Yunxiang Zhang
References
Nabokov, V. V. (1989). Pale fire. Vintage International.
Mary McCarthy, (1962) Bolt from the Blue, New Republic.
