131–140 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Kinbote is really a comic figure" I say this name in Christopher Lloyd's voice: "That's Kinbotay! Tay! Tay!!" In my head, of course.
Any relation to Lord Kinbote of X-files fame? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIyDJxP-b6o
Pale Fire has been my favorite book for a long, long time, ever since I read it as part of a course in university. After all these years I haven't read a better, more intricately-constructed book. It was suggested to me to read the intro first, then skip the poem and read the endnotes start to finish, then to go back and read the poem. The index is part of the fiction and must also be read. I think the keys to really…
none of those questions have definitive answers I will limit my criticism to saying that this is a trope adopted very often these days and it is not one to which my personality is suited. I like mysteries but I do not like treadmills, running without arriving.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might enjoy this video: _Blade Runner 2049 | "Cells Interlinked" and Pale Fire (LITERALLY ME! INCELS INTERLINKED)_ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtLvtMqWNz8
I watched it. Thank you for the recommendation. Sounds absolutely fascinating. I just started the second Hyperion book, but I might have to put it down to prioritize this. It does seem like somewhat of an investment though; as if reading it in bed might not be the most optimal way to enjoy the experience. It might require some more dedicated reading sessions from what I'm seeing in the other threads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You destroyed this by altering the linebreaking. And it’s misquoted in other ways.
You're not wrong, but it was from memory. I invite you to look it up and post the correct version.
I was the shadow of the waxwing slain
By the false azure in the windowpane;
I was the smudge of ashen fluff—and I
Lived on, flew on, in the reflected sky.
I think I did alright for recalling it from several years ago. I will in fact, retract my agreement and classify your criticism as overly harsh.
If you are going to read Pale Fire, get it on paper. I tried to read it on my Kindle and the UI is not up to task of lots of flipping back and forth between the poem and the prose sections.
Is this a "Bookworm's book?" Much like a "skier's mountain" or a "band's band," is this the kind of book that only appeals to a narrow audience that likes to pick apart the mechanics of a book? Or is this a book like Harry Potter, which was panned by the critics, but otherwise is awesome popular fiction?
But popular fiction it ain't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 'hook' of Pale Fire is this: ostensibly you're reading a long-form poem with a foreword and footnotes and editing by a friend of the poet (a poet of some eminence), but it soon becomes apparent that the editor is trying to jam his own life story into those footnotes. If you like that idea, I think you'd like the book.
Other books I know of that play with part or all of the text itself being an artifact of the fiction: - The Third Policeman , Flann O’Brian. Fictional scholar of a fictional esoteric philosopher weaves his commentary on same philosopher into an account of his… journey. - If on a Winter’s Night a Traveler , Italo Calvino. You(!) embark on an adventure to find the book you believed you purchased, which was If on a Wint…
The Book of the New Sun
Soldier of the mist
In both, the author presents himself as a translator for a text he came across which was written by the main character of the story. In the first, the text came from the distant future. In the second, ancient Greece. They are both incredible.
I have not yet read Pale Fire, but I loved Lolita and hope to read it soon. Nabokov's writing is so rich, the writing itself (aside from the story!) is worth lingering over and savoring. I've only found a few other writers with a similar quality - Proust, Milton, perhaps Cormac McCarthy and Toni Morrison. Does anyone know of authors with a similar property? I'm not even sure what to call it, so it's difficult to sear…
I suppose it's quite off-topic, but some weeks ago I read a small book by Mary Gaitskill, the writer of the piece. It's called "Lost Cat". I highly recommend it. Ironically, it might be an approximate opposite of Pale Fire. It's very short, with simple yet beautiful prose, filled with intense, raw emotions.
https://unherd.com/2022/06/the-death-of-literature/
The link contains audio of her reading from a favorite passage of the novel.
I was excited to read Pale Fire after reading what I consider to be one of the finest novels ever written, Lolita. The protagonist is a monster, but the writing is so eloquent - and not even in the author's original tongue! Pale Fire was simply boring to me. I am not extremely literary, so a lot of it probably went over my head, but I was rather disappointed it didn't shine like his 1955 masterpiece.
Lolita is probably Nabokov's most accessible book, or at least the most accessible of his I've read, but I bet part of what you liked there is that you, the reader, don't interact with Humbert Humbert in quite the same way that Humbert thinks about himself, or might expect you would interact with him. Nabokov is profoundly good at this sort of authorial/editorial/linguistic misdirection.
On those terms, Pale Fire is a sort of 3d chess version of Lolita. Obviously the topic is different, at least, the surface topic is different. Obsession is still very much a topic.
Anyway, you might enjoy reading more Nabokov! Don't give up on him! To my mind he's one of the literary gifts from the 20th century. And you might enjoy Pale Fire on a re-read, but I'd recommend something else by him (or a few palate-cleansing/getting deeper on the Nabokov vibe choices) if it left you cold. It left me a little cold, too. I've been re-reading Ada or Ardor recently which I'd say is really outstanding, if longer and more florid than Lolita.