This Slate article by Ron Rosenbaum has started a fierce debate on MetaFilter and doubtless many other places: "It's the question of whether the last unpublished work of Vladimir Nabokov, which is now reposing unread in a Swiss bank vault, should be destroyedas Nabokov explicitly requested before he died." My own take is that if he felt that strongly about it he should have destroyed it himself, and that once you're dead you lose the right to determine the fate of your work, but I can sympathize with those who believe Nabokov's wishes should be respected. Mind you, we're talking about "fifty hand-written index cards, equivalent to about thirty conventional paper manuscript pages," so The Original of Laura can hardly be called a novel, and it certainly shouldn't be published as if it were (much less "completed" by someone else), but I think it should be available at least to scholars. VV would be furious, but he was furious about a lot of things, including nonliteral translations and using the feminine forms of Russian names, so this would just be one more hypothetical annoyance.
Posted by languagehat at January 21, 2008 02:20 PMThe idea of burning anything by Nabokov isn't only criminal - it's in bad taste. He wrote some great short stories, so I don't mind reading a 30 page piece by him. Nor am I worried that it's a fragment if it's any good. However after Pnin (1957) Nabokov's work wasn't so good, so I don't expect much from Laura.
An alternative interpretation - this is a publicity stunt, and a pretty good one.
Posted by: Kobi Haron at January 21, 2008 03:00 PM "furious about ... using the feminine forms of Russian names".
Many, many years ago I took a course on the novel at Harvard by a visiting professor (which I was much too young to appreciate). About all I remember now is that he insisted the "a" of Karenina must be silent. This was in a course that began with a study of "Don Kwiksit".
Dmitri at least sounds like a more reasonable guy than Stephen Joyce, James's grandson, who has made life miserable for Joyce scholars by denying permission for access, performance rights and quotations, and has possibly destroyed Joyce family documents. (New Yorker story by D.T. Max on this saga: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/06/19/060619fa_fact)
It doesn't sound like the son will be able to bring himself to destroy it; and as long as it exists, I don't imagine the pressure will let up for him to release it.
Posted by: Ran at January 21, 2008 05:25 PM"using the feminine forms of Russian names"
uh ...... anyone care to explain this? (as in what's the issue and why did it bug him?)
Posted by: michael farris at January 21, 2008 05:51 PMI don't know why it bothered him enough to be "furious" about it, but he did hold that in English you should use the same form for men and women since English doesn't have two forms, hence "Anna Karenin". FWIW, I work with two Russian women emigrees and one does (-sky) and the other doesn't (-ova).
I will grant you that it can make relationships a bit more opaque to Anglophone readers.
Posted by: The Ridger at January 21, 2008 07:28 PMbut he did hold that in English you should use the same form for men and women since English doesn't have two forms
Which makes no sense at all. English doesn't have Russian names in the first place, so why mention them? "Vladimir"—what kind of name is that? We'll call you "Fred," OK?
I always tell people who favor the Anna Karenin approach: "If you're also willing to talk about Martina Navratil, fine. Otherwise, I don't want to hear about it."
Posted by: language hat at January 21, 2008 08:02 PMMy translation of Anna Karenina dropped the -a. As it is, I had enough difficulty keeping straight the long Russian names; had husbands and wives not even had the same last names, it would have been that much harder. (When I'm reading a book and I don't know the names, I don't pronounce them fully in my head, so they're distinguished largely by a few key letters, with arbitrary and unconscious criteria for what makes a letter "key." And I know I'm not the only one who does this, because my classmates would often read names aloud completely wrong, with letters flipped and inserted and dropped seemingly at random.)
Posted by: Ran at January 21, 2008 08:31 PMReally? It would have been difficult for you to connect Karenin and Karenina? Well, then I'm glad you found a translation that made it easier for you, but I wonder how common that is.
Posted by: language hat at January 21, 2008 09:36 PMI think it should be published as a stack of index cards. Y'know, in a little box. Handwritten.
Posted by: Kári Tulinius at January 21, 2008 10:58 PMAs a young teenager, my sister became a voracious novel reader. She liked to tell us about her reading, but the names of the characters in the novels some of us had already read sounded very strange as she read them much too fast to take the trouble to pronounce them with any accuracy. She must have been doing the same thing that Ran describes.
Even Virgil wanted his unfinished book to be burned after his death. If his friends Varius & Tucca had fulfilled his wish, now we wouldn't have the Aeneid...
Posted by: Agostino at January 22, 2008 10:17 AMExactly, and Kafka wanted all his work burned.
Posted by: language hat at January 22, 2008 02:01 PMI was surprised when I read that MeFi thread to see that no-one had yet said "You know who ELSE burned books?" I suppose someone must have by now, though.
Posted by: Matt at January 23, 2008 12:45 AMFrankly, Kafka's work should have been burned. <duck & cover> But that's something you can only find out after you've read it...
Posted by: David Marjanović at January 25, 2008 06:18 PM"You know who ELSE burned books?"
I DID!!! HA HA HA!!!!!
No, really, about 20-years ago I had a book-burning party. Many people were ... not pleased by the name, but no one who actually listened to my explanation (including a number of librarians) found it offensive.
Posted by: michael farris at January 27, 2008 04:56 PMinteresting take on the decision not to obey kafka's instructions to burn everything in one of milan kundera's books of essays btw.
i have to take exception to the disparagement of vn's post-pnin work as well. ada, or ardor, is a masterpiece -- and would be a vocabulary goldmine for this site, too.
Posted by: hw at January 28, 2008 08:35 PMI agree, and I've been meaning to reread it for years.
Posted by: language hat at January 29, 2008 08:36 AM