Lectures on Literature

The above is quoted directly from this book and in particular is a comment made in reference by Nabokov on Flaubert's Madam Bovary.This expresses a thought I have had for decades, but lack Nabokov's brilliance eloquence.The scattered gems that sparkle throughout this book are what kept me reading.And now I know that the preceding is a hackneyed image, and why it is a ...What might you be looking for that would bring you to this collection of lectures?Like me, you want to view literature from inside the mind of a favorite writer.You are a serious student of the written word and open to advice on how to read.You have been assigned a paper on one or more of the following:Jan Austin's Mansfield ParkCharles Dickens's Bleak HouseRobert Louis Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. HydeMarcel Proust's The Walk by Swan's WayFranz Kafka's The MetamorphosisJames Joyce's UlyssesIn other words this is not a book that will appeal to many readers. Speaking as a fan of Nabokov, this fan status may not be sufficient motive to finish the lectures.Absent a plot summery, these are lectures given by VN as a professor of European Literature at Cornell University in 1948. The above selections represent not so much VN`s personal favorites, but examples he chose to facilitate lecture points. The lectures tend to contain highly detailed recountings of each book. Within each discussion is an emphasis on the details, the geography, specific events and images chosen by each writer. His thesis seems to be that writer's use these details to specify the created universe that is their particular universe.Nabokov believes that the writer is a creator. Readers who insist that the writer is recounting experience and retelling reality are missing the point of the creative process. That is; within a story reality is no more or less than what the writer needs it to be. Therefore details matter. Further more a real reader has a duty to reread works of art or else risk missing these details. Not only read for detail, but "fondle" them.Against this concept, at once romantic and mechanistic Nabokov adds in another eloquent observation. A real reader:"In order to bask in that magic a wise reader reads the book of genius not with his heart, not so much with his brain, but with his spine." (Thank you [web reference removed]For also noting this quote)It is the tingle between the shoulders that marks a good read, and a good reader.For all of this I have to agree with many of the other reviewers here at Amazon. There is something overly sanitized and dispassionate about Nabokov's method of literary analysis. Great themes and cosmic struggles fall away while we create maps and clock synchronicities. VN may not care about `isms' and 'ists'; but are we better readers if we see the art as so many themes and specifics?The almost Victorian squeamishness Nabokov demonstrates on matter of sex and body functions -he is hampered in his ability to fully discuss or appreciate Ulysses may be appreciated by those who automatically dismiss books with such references. Yet this same VN is the author of the famous novel, Lolita. This is a book about a pedophile. Granted, an oversimplification, but the irony exists.I am glad I finished this book. I am not sure how long it will be before I attempt more literary analyses by Vladimir Nabokov.

I would like to thank reviewer Bruce Kendall for pointing out this book to me. This is a great book.By the way, I have one reservation about this book: it has seven chapters, one on each of seven novels, and do not read a chapter on one of the seven novel until you have read the novel. He gives lots of details and it will ruin your reading experience. Just read one novel at a time and then read Nakobov's lecture notes on that particular novel. The only exception might be "Ulysses" where most readers need help and often use a reading guide. He gives a very detailed analysis of the plot and characters for all seven works, and for one book - "The Metamorphosis" - the comments are almost as long as the 55 page story.It would be quite an experience if one could sit in on the classes of say Saul Bellow in Chicago in the 1930s and 40s when he taught literature. He recommended Flaubert, Dostoevsky, Lawrence, Joyce, and Dreiser, among others. Anyway, this is the next best thing. It is the course notes with an introduction by John Updike on the course taught by Nabokov at Cornell around 1950 or so.He was born in Russia but learned English and French at an early age. His father was murdered in Russia, and was carrying a copy of Madame Bovary at the time of his death.He went to university in England but then lived in Germany for 15 years, and then came to the Boston area where he taught at Wellesley College as just an Assistant Prof. teaching Russian 201, a survey of Russian literature. He worked simultaneously at Harvard for about 10 years, but not in literature. He then got a position as Associate Prof. of Slavic Literature at Cornell.Nabokov's main love was literature, but since he was not in the English Department, he could not teach American literature, so he gave courses on European literature. This book outlines course material prepared by Nabokov for courses 311-312, Masters of European fiction.If you read this book, it is similar to taking his course. His approach is to examine a small number of books and look at each great detail. There is lots of analysis plus some sample exam questions at the back of the book.His seven books are:Jane Austen - Mansfield ParkCharles Dickens - Bleak HouseGustave Flaubert - Madame BovaryRobert Louis Stevenson - Dr. Jekyll and Mr. HydeMarcel Proust - The Walk by Swann's PlaceFranz Kafka - The MetamorphosisJames Joyce - UlyssesThis is an excellent lecture series prepared by Nabokov with his handwritten notes and sketches.There is a note from him that he had more fun looking at the literature than the students. He was working on Lolita as he taught, and actually threw out the manuscript. His wife convinced him to continue and publish, and he was able to retire with the income from that book.

Vladimir Nabokov delivered his lectures on literature at Wellesley and Cornell between 1941 and 1958. The tone is chatty and eloquent, pedagogical and playful, the persistent punning and alliteration reminiscent of his fictional works. Nevertheless, these posthumously published essays are fragmentary and cobbled together with much editorial meddling, the rhythm and cadence of the prose nothing compared to the polish of the published Nabokov. They are unapologetically frank and doctrinaire, although Nabokov's strictly aesthetic approach, stripped of historical context and ideological influence, makes for some blinkered results.It is the first lecture, however, 'Good Readers and Good Writers', which is of most interest. In this brief introduction, Nabokov constructs the ideal Nabokovian reader. They must 'fondle details', read with the 'telltale tingle' in the spine, and be in possession of a quartet of essentials, namely a dictionary, good memory, artistic sense, and imagination. The reader must never identify themselves with the hero/heroine, nor should they measure the work against reality. All art is deception, and the novel's world adheres to its own autonomous rules, rules to which the reader must submit.Nabokov explodes a bomb beneath these tenets and the debris descends upon the various lectures. Although the narratives are linearly tackled, Nabokov is more daring on the aspects of form (structure + style), and his elucidation of Flaubert's poetic precision and the unfolding metaphors of Proust's In Search of Lost Time are gracefully handled. The mammoth essay on Ulysses is an immense achievement, the perfect companion piece to such a complex work, and Nabokov's painstaking recreation of Bloom's Dublin (complete with detailed diagrams) is a testament to the necessity of close reading (he even solves the riddle of The Man in the Brown Macintosh).The sole grumble is aimed at the publisher. Nabokov liked to quote large chunks of the novel under discussion, but the publisher (or editor) takes no pains to differentiate the quoted text from Nabokov's, thus making it hard to follow who's writing what. It becomes an irritating muddle that could, and should, have been avoided.As far as literary criticism goes, then, Nabokov's is not overly sophisticated, but he expertly unpicks the tapestries of the novels and exposes their mysterious weaves. Although Nabokov's prodding pedagogy can become tiresome, his enthusiasm disperses such mounting annoyance, as his infectious words goad the reader into confronting the beautiful and blissful art of the novel.

If you love intelligence and value language, this is as close as one can get to an ideal conversation about literature.

Mi è molto piaciuto il fatto che Nabokov mette nella sua critica una carica di passione che non può non intrigare l'uditorio di studenti universitari e anche di amanti della letteratura in genere

Un écrivain français surestimé, dont on commence heureusement à moins parler ces derniers temps, s'est permis, dans un des ses derniers ouvrages, de dire le mal qu'il pensait de Nabokov. On se gardera de contester cette intéressante prise de position. C'est néanmoins l'occasion de s'intéresser de nouveau à l'auteur de Lolita, que peu de gens semblent avoir lu. Le livre-scandale est connu davantage par son titre que par son contenu littéraire. Si les démêlés d'Humbert Humbert et Lo évoquent des images à certains, c'est surtout grâce aux deux films ayant exploité les péripéties du roman. Cependant, la beauté du livre de Nabokov, au-delà du thème de l'obsédé à la recherche de la nymphette parfaite, est d'une nature spécifiquement littéraire.Dans « Lectures on litterature », le professeur Nabokov nous fait goûter, de manière progressive, aux mets les plus exquis. Et c'est mieux que n'importe quel cours, ou traité savant. Ici, vous approchez Austen, Flaubert, Proust, Joyce sous la bienveillante conduite d'un artiste et non d'un universitaire pédant. Vous découvrez l'évolution de l'art littéraire moderne, à travers l'oeil gourmand et parfois cruel d'un écrivain de premier plan. Cela peut irriter, car le bonhomme a ses parti pris, ses têtes de turc, en particulier l'abhorré philistin. Il ne prétend nullement à l'objectivité mais cherche avant tout à transmettre l'amour de l'art, comme cet autre transmetteur de gai savoir qu'est Umberto Eco. Car, au final, le grand écrivain est d'abord pédagogue, conteur, et, par dessus tout, enchanteur. N'en déplaise à Mr Houellebecq.

Nabokov's astute and original analysis of some of the most wellknown and important classics never ceases to amaze me. He often presents motives and structures in the works that I had never thought, but afterwards seem as clear as the light of day.I'd definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in getting a wholly original analysis of these classics! Thoroughly enjoyable and bound to give you a lot of new insights.