Fathers, Sons and Impostors - Pushkin's Trace in The Gift
Fathers, Sons and Impostors - Pushkin's Trace in The Gift
Fathers, Sons and Impostors - Pushkin's Trace in The Gift
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Slavic Review
Monika Greenleaf
Nabokov's The Gift opens with the mock specificity of a date: 1 April
192-, which immediately, we are informed, calls attention to the Rus-
sian novelistic practice of "honest fictionality."' The long metaliterary
excursus draws attention away from the specificity of one particular
date, which the author, as it were, refuses to complete: on 1 April 1922
Nabokov's father, the respected statesman Vladimir Dmitrievich Na-
bokov, was buried in Berlin, three days after his heroic, though for-
tuitous death in a right-wing assassination attempt on a former Kadet
ally, P.N. Miliukov.2 All that is left of one of the great tragedies of
Nabokov's life is the ironic precipitate of the self-canceling date and
the fact that for the protagonist of the novel, Fyodor Godunov-Cher-
dyntsev, it is "moving day," a move from one life into another. Is there
any connection between the protagonist's pushkinian name and the
project that the author bequeaths him: to mourn his father? Many of
Nabokov's heroes will face a similar predicament; in John Burt Foster's
words, "even as they struggle to recall their personal pasts, they must
also come to terms with cultural memories that reflect current interests
of their most immediate audiences."3 Nabokov's emigre audience also
hungered for an elegiac work that would at last do justice to Russia's
losses, yet, as Mandel'shtam put it, "There is nothing less conducive to
poetic inspiration than ears waiting to hear."4 How was Nabokov to
1. Vladimir Nabokov, The Gift, trans. Michael Scammell with collaboration of the
author (London: Penguin Books, 1988), 11. All quotations in English will be from this
edition. This article was originally presented as a paper at Stanford University, U.C.
Berkeley and Harvard. I would like to take the opportunity to thank those audiences
for their constructive and open-minded comments, in particular: Hans Ulrich Gum-
brecht, Robert Hughes, William Mills Todd III, Cathy Frierson, Elizabeth Ransome
and Svetlana Boym. I owe special thanks to Irina Paperno and John Burt Foster for
their very helpful comments and attentive reading of my manuscript.
2. Brian Boyd, Vladimir Nabokov: The Russian Years (Princeton: Princeton Univer-
sity Press, 1990), 189-95.
3. John Burt Foster, Jr., Nabokov's Art of Memory and European Modernism (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1993), 40.
4. Osip Mandel'shtam, "Word and Culture," in The Complete Critical Prose and
Letters, ed. Jane Gary Harris (Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1979), 114.
perform this pressing elegiac act without compromising his artistic and
human privacy?
Let me review a few elements of the context in which The Gift
appeared. First, the emigration: for all its hardship, heartbreak, the
claustrophobic proximity of fellow expatriates who didn't belong to
one's "set" and the internecine strife over political and cultural differ-
ences that are always writ large in any miniature society,5,the emigra-
tion restored to writers an audience, a literary institution and a style
of communication that had not existed in Russian literature since the
salons of the 1820s.6 That wonderful semipermeable membrane be-
tween reality and literature, which allowed readers to anticipate that
they might find themselves or their Petersburg friends wandering into
the pages of Eugene Onegin or frequenting the milieu from which it had
arisen, had disappeared with the formation of a literary relation be-
tween author and public that was on a much larger, more anonymous
scale. The first thing we notice about The Gift is the reminiscent shim-
mer of its romantic irony: the way it now addresses, then represents
its fellow-emigre audience inside the text; while the subject "I," in
Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe's and Jean-Luc Nancy's terms, now projects
or disperses himself (the better to ensure his power, of course) into
the multiplicity of personages or "characters" that he constructs, now
dissolves his fiction to reveal the god-like imagination behind its in-
carnations-the creative matrix itself.7 By this act of ironic self-dou-
bling ("Vsegda ia rad zametit' raznost' mezhdu Oneginym i mnoi" [I'm
always glad to note the disparity between Onegin and me])8 the author
creates a labile, deniable relationship with his fictional protagonist,
without renouncing their common lyrical substratum.
Nabokov may treat emigre society with undisguised disdain and
mockery, yet he is addressing readers who not only know the same
street names and shops, the rented rooms and shabby kulturnost' (cul-
turedness) of emigre Berlin, but also share unspoken values and atti-
tudes: intensely elegiac, yet intolerant of others' vulgar sentiments and
memories; adversarial toward both "them"-the lowly native, "host"
culture-and the surviving Soviet citizens, Russian by geographical
misnomer only, in whose hands every cultural pursuit, from poetry to
5. Marc Raeff gives a rather objective account in Russia Abroad: A Cultural History
of the Russian Emigration, 1919-1939 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990); Nina
Berberova's memoir (The Italics Are Mine, trans. Philippe Radley [New York: Harcourt,
Brace and World, 1969]) reflects some of those problems.
6. Here I am referring to the set of institutional paradigms identified by William
Mills Todd III in his analysis of the successive structures of nineteenth century Russian
literary life, from court to salon to journal. See his Fiction and Society in the Age of
Pushkin: Ideology, Institutions, and Narrative (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986),
chaps. 1-2.
7. Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe and Jean-Luc Nancy, L'Absolu litt&raire: Theorie de la
litt&rature du romantisme allemand (Paris: Seuil, 1978), 204.
8. Alexander Pushkin, Evgenii Onegin, chap. 1, st. LVI. For a fuller discussion of
romantic irony in Pushkin, please see the chapter on Eugene Onegin in my Pushkin and
Romantic Fashion (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994).
chess, has become a tawdry parody; convinced that they have brought
the real Russia like contraband into exile with them.9 Exile introduces
duality into time and space: what is real is what is absent, recoverable
only by means of linguistic signs.10 Participation in literature becomes
an act of communion with a spiritualized, noumenal Russia." The
issue of legitimacy naturally comes to the fore in such a context: which
strand of Russia's cultural inheritance represented the "true Russia"
that the emigration should preserve, who was its "true father" (and
who wasn't); and secondly, who then were his "true" heirs?
From another point of view, the emigration's preoccupation with
literary succession is a natural by-product of the work of mourning. In
his book on The English Elegy Peter Sachs has shown that elegiac forms
retain many traces of their origins in funeral rites by which the sur-
vivors not only expressed their private grief, but also competed for the
dead's inheritance. By transcribing inchoate pain and the formlessness
of death itself into "the language of the fathers,"'-2 an inherited and
public language of elegiac form, the elegiac poet gives his society a
cultural mechanism for consolation and survival. By "beginning again,"
inserting his own grief into the profoundly repetitive rhythmic struc-
tures, rhymes and mythic figures of elegy, he restores patterned control
over pain, events and time. In particular, by dramatizing his own sit-
uation, the mourner places himself outside it, no longer the victim of
separation or loss, but its author-even, in a sense, its romantic ironist.
A great elegy is, however, never merely a nostalgic tribute. Its act
of self-assertion vis-a-vis the other claimants to the inheritance is
grounded in a painful and often unwilling submission of the self s love,
rage and individual experience to a publicly intelligible and authori-
tative language; it trades the infinity and uniqueness of its own feeling
for an isolate public artifact and for the cultural authority that accrues
from this act of sublimation. Often it is a preceding elegiac poet or
father figure who is being mourned, and whose authority is thus being
simultaneously celebrated and supplanted. The act of elegiac mourn-
ing is reciprocal: it asserts both the authority of the true father, perhaps
out of many pretenders, and of the true son out of many rivals for his
mastery. To put it another way, it invents its own genealogy. Thus an
implicit part of the elegiac drama is the aggressive purging of false
artistic models, false mourning, imposter fathers and sons, false starts.
The ferocious post-revolutionary struggle over Pushkin's inherit-
ance that began in Russia and continued with renewed energy and
13. Concurrently with Nabokov, Marina Tsvetaeva was writing her two brilliant
prose studies, "Moi Pushkin" and "Pushkin i Pugachev"; during her years of enforced
silence Anna Akhmatova worked on the series of studies collected later under the title
Zapiski o Pushkine; earlier, of course, there were Briusov's "Moi Pushkin," Man-
del'shtam's "Pushkin i Skriabin," and Khodasevich's "Koleblemyi trenozhnik," among
many others.
14. See Sergei Davydov, "Weighing Nabokov's Gift on Pushkin's Scales," in Cul-
tural Mythologies of Russian Modernism: From the Golden Age to the Silver Age, eds. Boris
Gasparov, Robert P. Hughes and Irina Paperno (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1992), 415-28.
15. See John E. Malmstad, "Khodasevich and Formalism: A Poet's Dissent," in
Russian Formalism: A Retrospective Glance: A Festschrift in Honor of Victor Erlich, eds. Robert
LouisJackson and Stephen Rudy (New Haven: Yale Center for International and Area
Studies Publications, 1985), 68-81; David M. Bethea, Khodasevich: His Life and Art (Prin-
ceton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 317-31; R. Hagglund, "The Russian Emigre
Debate of 1928 on Criticism," Slavic Review 32 (September 1973): 515-26, and "The
Adamovich-Khodasevich Polemics," Slavic and East EuropeanJournal 20 (Fall 1976): 239-
52.
16. Nabokov, "Foreword" to The Gift (1988), 8.
17. Reported in Brian Boyd's account of Nabokov's years at Cornell (1948-1950),
in Vladimir Nabokov: The American Years (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991),
134.
18. The origin of the rumor about Khodasevich appears to be Berberova's The
Italics Are Mine, 566. See Footnote 20 to "The Gift" in David Rampton, Vladimir Nabokov:
A Critical Study of the Novels (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 190. The
more obvious phonetic association of Koncheev's name is with conch (Latin concha:
provingly over Fyodor's fledgling works in The Gift, but the story ac-
tually told is about the progressive abandonment of Russian poetry
and the legitimation of the form that takes its place: a novel liberated
from "the greybeards of Russian literature"'9 and restored to its true
pushkinian lineage.20 Indeed, The Gift's determined russocentrism sug-
gests the genealogical omission not only of rival contemporary poets
but also of European modernists like Proust andJoyce who had already
turned the fictional autobiography into a simultaneous demonstration
and investigation of poetic memory and image-making.2'
Khodasevich's response to Nabokov's novels set the tone for almost
all subsequent critical reception. In his article "On Sirin" (1937), he
identified the formalist nucleus of each work, up to but not including
The Gift, showing that devices "turn out to be its indispensably impor-
tant characters" and Nabokov's main intent not to create a portrait of
the artist as a young man, and certainly not of his "life and times," but
"to show how devices live and work."22 Since then, critics have eagerly
and ingeniously performed the role of Nabokov's "good readers," prov-
ing that the heroine of The Gift is indeed not Zina but Nabokov's
allegorical history of Russian literature, its hero not Fyodor Godunov
but the shklovskian "knight's move" of artistic distortion (sdvig), which
Nabokov shares? appropriates? parodies? in his own representation of
the irreducible otherness of genius.23 By this logic, the closer we are
to formalism, the closer we are to Pushkin-an equation I am not sure
Khodasevich intended to make.24
In a recent study, Irina Paperno has shown that those very "devices"
with which Fyodor Godunov rewrites the literary past and demon-
strates art's utter independence from "life" (that is, the montage of
documentary sources, addition of color and sound, the realization of
metaphor and metaphoricization of life) are, after all, embedded in a
historical context-the post-revolutionary critical doctrine of formal-
ism.25 Fyodor reworks the travelers' notes and Chernyshevsky memoirs
in precisely the same way that Shklovskii's Tolstoy and Tynianov's
Pushkin were shown to have assembled "montages" of historical sources
in War and Peace and "Journey to Arzrum."26 Even as she has coll
paragraphs from the dazzling array of travel and memoir sources from
which Nabokov assembled Fyodor's texts, Paperno has indicated that
she is merely following Nabokov's instructions-"a chain of indicators
carefully prepared for the reader-investigator" (at one point she even
has that reader follow Fyodor to the Berlin Library and pore, Tatyana-
like, over pencil-marks left in the margins of those documents). Pa-
perno has not suppressed the ambivalence that Nabokov critics must
feel on having "cracked the code": aren't they just picking up the trail
of crumbs Nabokov left especially for them-formalist-structuralist, de-
vice-minded readers?27
Concentrating on those parts of the book where Fyodor is clearly
rewriting antecedent texts, "good readers" of The Gift steer a wide berth
around the rest. For example, Paperno has collated a passage from
Grum-Grzhimailo's Description of aJourney to Western China with "a char-
acteristic example of the manner in which Fyodor/Nabokov works with
his material, the description of a stop at lake Kuka-Nor:
off the self- proliferating power of a rumor not with the literal achieve-
ments of his good government, which, as he complains, are constantly
turned against him, but with an act of commensurate verbal and sym-
bolic power that prevents him from passing on his legacy to his son.
Pushkin's play is concerned less with differentiating legitimate from
illegitimate authority than with dramatizing the power of language-
pustoe slovo-to rename and remake "reality," the princely gift of im-
posture.36 Pushkin shifted the idea of "pretending" or imposture
(samozvanstvo) from its traditional classification in Karamzin and the
chroniclers as a black sin against the divine order to the pinnacle of
a machiavellian scale of values. The most powerful character in Push-
kin's play is, after all, the modest monk Pimen, who uses his highly
selective memory to rewrite its plot-a key structural irony Nabokov
later showed he was quite aware of when, in Speak, Memory, he recalled
his boyhood impression of the opera: "My weak responsiveness to mu-
sic was completely overrun by the visual torment of not being able to
read over Pimen's shoulder."37
Amid the swirling historical events and violence of the Smuta, there
is one moment of stillness when father and son talk about maps, and
Boris seems briefly to glimpse the possibility of a different kind of
power he can bequeath to his son-or perhaps that he should learn
from him.
Ljapb
[...] A TbI, MOEi CbIH, qeM 3aHAT? 3TO qTO?
(Deoaop
Uapb
(And you, my son, what are you busy with? What's this?/Drawing of
Moscow's land; our tsardom/from end to end. So you see: here's Mos-
cow./Here's Novgorod, here's Astrakhan'. There's the sea,/there the
dense forests of Perm',/while there is Siberia.[ ...]
/How fine! Now that is the sweet fruit of scholarship!/As from the
clouds you can survey/the whole kingdom at once: borders, cities, riv-
ers.... /Someday, and soon, perhaps,/all the regions, which you have
just now/represented so cleverly on paper,/all these will be delivered
into your hands... .)38
When I suggest that Boris Godunov mediates between the fragmen-
tary realia of Nabokov's last conversation with his father, I do not mean
to identify only the issue of father-son legitimacy. I connect the sheets
of newspaper silently sliding through the last chink between his father
and himself with Pushkin's scene of symbolic bequest, because in that
scene the father recognizes and approves the potential power of his
son's representations-"which you have just now represented so clev-
erly on paper"-of Russia. In other words, it is the creative gift of
"pretending" or "self-naming," once Boris Godunov's own strong suit,
that is being passed on. It is just such a scene of paternal legitimation
that Fyodor Godunov pursues throughout Nabokov's novel.
Although the portrait of Fyodor Godunov's father in The Gift was
considered by his friends to be a very true likeness of V.D. Nabokov,
one major area of his life was eliminated by its author: his dedicated
career of legal reform, governmental service and constitutional law,
Boris Godunov-like in a period reminiscent of a latter-day Smuta, is
replaced in the novel by Konstantin Godunov-Cherdyntsev's apolitical
naturalism and exaggerated contempt for everything merely historical
and human. Nabokov's father was instrumental in the formation of the
Duma of 1905, for which he was stripped of his academic position, led
the Kadets with Miliukov, was drafted and served in the war, and then
worked tirelessly to create a constitutional basis for the provisional
government which he later documented in one of the most important
historical memoirs of the period, The Provisional Government. As editor
of the journal Rul' he continued to lead the politically fractured Rus-
sian emigration.39 Godunov-Cherdyntsev's professional and intellec-
tual life inverts each of these details: a scholarly naturalist and ex-
plorer, he avoids the war in order to continue his monumental work
38. Alexander Pushkin, the scene "Tsarskie palaty" in Boris Godunov, Polnoe so-
branie sochinenii v desiati tomakh (Leningrad: Nauka, 1978), V: 225. My translation.
39. Boyd, 26-34, 54-67, 75-77, 11, 122-35, 138-44, 154-60, 188-91. Laura En-
gelstein provides a closer view of V.D. Nabokov as a forensic lawyer concerned with
progressive reform in the areas of prostitution, abortion, child abuse, women's rights
and homosexuality (see her The Keys to Happiness: Sex and the Search for Modernity in Fin-
de-Siecle Russia [Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992], 68-86, 281).
40. Anne Nesbet has shown that a triangular suicide-pact similar to the one in
The Gift had been featured in the emigre press as a symptom of the generation's
spiritual malaise (see her "Suicide as Literary Fact in the 1920's," Slavic Review 50, no.
4 [Winter 1991], 827-35).
41. See the chapter, "The Sense of Not Ending: Romantic Irony in Eugene Onegin,"
in Pushkin and Romantic Fashion.
Actually, framing the bright little cubes of the poems in the much
richer and more ambivalent memories of Fyodor's rereading mind
places the poems at a disadvantage. Even as he reads, Fyodor begins
to question whether such symmetrical little structures, now compared
to a room white-shuttered against the "helpless darkness" of the gar-
den, now to a verbal fence designed to keep the "dangerous reader"
out,45 have not kept out every other challenge to their brittle order.
His father, for example, is much too large to be contained by them.
More important than the poems themselves is the counterpoint Na-
bokov sets up between the poems and the surrounding prose.
In his late story "Egyptian Nights" Pushkin used a similar embed-
ded structure of poem within prose-tale to dramatize poetry's trans-
formational power over the flat prose-frame of reality. Nabokov
achieves the opposite effect: embedded in the sinuous prose of
Fyodor's rereading memory, the poems reveal their limitations. An
eloquent instance is the paired poems about the periodic winding of
the grandfather clock, followed euphemistically by next morning's jolly
wake-up call. What is excised by the poems is restored by the prose of
Fyodor's memory: the intervening demon-ridden night, the "endless
measure of my insomnias," the psychic cavern for whose torments a
language does not yet exist, where only his father-and Pushkin-have
preceded him. It is the prose, not the poems, which presses against the
borders of verbally conquered experience, in which Fyodor screams in
an unintelligible Mongolian voice to his human captors. And it is in
the prose that we recognize the unmistakable trace of Pushkin's most
innovative lyrics: "Stikhi, sochinennye noch'iu vo vremia bessonnitsy"
(Verses composed at night during insomnia), with its ticking clock and
scrabbling mouse-like anxiety, and "Prorok" (The Prophet), with its
underwater monsters and ritually torn-out tongue. The white book of
44. The Gift, 139. In fact, nostalgic vignettes of childhood appear in Russian poetry
only with the modernists, and derive from the prose-memoir and pseudo-memoir, not
from the pushkinian elegy. Marina Tsvetaeva's child's eye lyrics in her early collections
Vechernii al'bom (1910) and Volshebnyifonar' (1912) are a more original, somewhat less
coy example of the genre. On the prose memoirs of the modernists, see Andrew
Wachtel, The Battle for Childhood: Creation of a Russian Myth (Stanford: Stanford Univer-
sity Press, 1990).
45. Ibid., 18.
poems is outgrown and left behind, but its failure points toward an
expansion of elegiac language.
Fyodor will continue throughout the book to compose poignant
elegiac verses on Russia and loss in readily recognizable classical me-
ters; but it is the richly meandering, associative path of his prose sen-
tences that allows him to slip through the cracks of his hated Berlin
reality to the "hothouse paradise of the past." At the end of each
nostalgic foray he is rewarded or frustrated by a glimpse of his father,
just turning away, always departing, "with a smile hidden in the corner
of his beard." As scrupulously as Fyodor and his mother try to separate
their own sentiments from the truth of their recollections, the mem-
ories they carefully assemble have an identical underlying structure:
they mimic separation and death, but always at the last minute grant
a reprieve.46 Thus in one anecdote, his mother recalls how her husband
disappeared on their honeymoon in pursuit of a butterfly. "Suddenly
I saw him walking across the lawn ... waving to me as if nothing had
happened ... his jacket torn on one side." In another a harsh separa-
tion is mitigated by the explorer galloping back on his white horse
and "parting quite differently this time." The memories choreograph
the father as always returning, transparently reflecting the family's de-
sire to recapture him, like an exotic butterfly, in the nets of domestic
sentiment. "Yes I know this is not the way to write-these exclamations
won't take me very deep-but my pen is not yet accustomed to follow-
ing the outlines of his image, and I myself abominate these unnecessary
curlicues." Yet it is precisely that backward-turned longing for resto-
ration that keeps Fyodor infinitely separated from his father. In this
state he is closer to the madly mourning Chernyshevsky-"a kind of
mocking variation on the theme of his own hope-suffused grief"47-
than to his adventurous, perpetually departing father.
What allows Fyodor egress from this dreamscape of eternal return?
As always in The Gift, all roads lead through Pushkin. Fyodor opens
"Journey to Arzrum" and hears in it "the one voice in a thousand that
he is looking for." But what exactly does Pushkin give him? A model
for exact, impersonal prose? An example of montage? Pushkin com-
posed "Journey to Arzrum" in 1835 from the notes of a trip he had
made in 1829 in order to escape the stifling reality of Petersburg and
to revisit the old haunts of his still earlier exile, which now had an odd
poetic attraction for him. (Note that the interval between the time of
writing [1835 and about 1935] and the past that each wants to recapture
[1820-1823 and 1922] is identical). Pushkin's trajectory took him away
from home geographically-in fact, he planned to meet the Russian
army on the Turkish front and accompany it to its exotic destination,
Arzrum-but imaginatively it was a journey back into his past. Or at
least he wanted it to be. In 'Journey to Arzrum" the past contin
46. John Burt Foster has pointed out to me that "the second half of chapter 9 in
Speak, Memory is built even more emphatically on the same logic."
47. Ibid., 104, 89.
eludes him; he sees the locales of his Romantic poems, cites a few lines
here and there, but the poetry of the past is dead, and cannot be
resuscitated. "Journey to Arzrum" is the story of a failed poetic jour-
ney. Pushkin travels at top speed, trying to propel himself beyond the
Russian border, beyond the border of the claustrophobically familiar,
but finds that border nightmarishly eluding him. In a particularly evoc-
ative moment, he fords the river Arpachai in order to set foot, for the
first time in his life, on foreign soil, only to discover that the other
bank has just been conquered: "I still found myself in unencompass-
able Russia."48
Yet his failure elegiacally to retrace his own poetic steps has given
birth to a completely new kind of prose, in appearance realistic yet,
in its metaphorical structure and its reason for being, essentially lyri-
cal. "The border held something mysterious for me," the phrase that
catches Fyodor's attention, refers not only to a spatial but also to a
literary border-crossing. Fyodor's intuition that he need go no further
than "Journey to Arzrum" in his search for a language commensurate
with his father and the pain of his loss is symbolically ratified by his
daydream of the palimpsestic fusion of his father's and Pushkin's hands,
and by the memory of his father's voice turning Pushkin's line-"Tut
Apollon-ideal, tam Niobeia-pechal'" (Here is Apollo the ideal, there
Niobe-sorrow)-into a lepidopterist's punning talisman.49
The hunt for butterflies, at first located in the childhood paradise
of the past, becomes an archaic quest through which the boy can follow
his father's steps out of childhood into manhood. At first the desire
for literal restoration, abandoned at the level of narrative, reappears
in their common study of butterflies, their migrations and mysteriously
uninterruptible life-cycles.50 Yet butterflies also remind Fyodor of the
elusiveness of his prey: four butterfly wings can be collected from the
forest floor, but the body itself has disappeared.
Why then do I feel so sad? His captures, his observations, the sound
of his voice in scientific works: all this, I think, I will preserve. But
that is still so little. With the same relative permanence I would like
to retain what it was, perhaps, that I loved most about him: his live
masculinity, inflexibility, and independence, the chill and warmth of
his personality, his power over everything that he undertook ... his
48. See my "Pushkin's 'Journey to Arzrum': The Poet at the Border," Slavic Review
50, no. 4 (Winter 1991): 940-53; and Davydov's illuminating comments on Pushkin
and Nabokov's alliterative prose (419).
49. "Pushkin entered his blood. With Pushkin's voice merged the voice of his
father. He kissed Pushkin's hot little hand, taking it for another, large hand smelling
of the breakfast kalach." Nabokov explains the paronomastic allusion to butterflies on
the same page (94). The lines are from Pushkin's 1836 lyric "Khudozhniku" ("Grusten
i vesel vkhozhu, vaiatel', v tvoiu masterskuiu .. ."), which is simultaneously a celebra-
tion of the artist's invention and craft, and an elegy to Del'vig, Pushkin's boyhood
friend and classicist-interlocutor.
50. Alexandrov discusses Fedor's "epiphanic apprehension of the complex life
of butterflies" on 118, 127, 136.
In my vicinity some witch doctors with the weary and crafty look of
competitors were collecting for their mercenary needs Chinese rhu-
barb, whose root bears an extraordinary resemblance to a caterpillar,
right down to its prolegs and spiracles-while I, in the meantime,
found under a stone the caterpillar of an unknown moth, which rep-
resented not in a general way but with absolute concreteness a copy
of that root, so that it was not quite clear which was impersonating
which-or why.56
55. Other details, such as the herd of moose frozen alive together with their
streaming tears, are reminiscent of Carroll's famous images. Nabokov was working on
his translation of Lewis Carroll, Ania v strane chudes, in summer 1922.
56. The Gift, 116-17.
57. The Gift, 113.
58. I have given chapter 4 short shrift because it has been very well served by
other critics. See Paperno, as well as Sergei Davydov's "The Gift: Nabokov's Aesthetic
Exorcism of Chernyshevskii," Canadian-American Slavic Studies 19, no. 3 (Fall 1985): 357-
74, for fine and detailed demonstrations of Nabokov's work with the documentary
literature. David Rampton displays a less parti pris attitude when, instead of joining
the ridicule, he demonstrates to what extent Nabokov misquotes, conflates quotations
or quotes out of context in order to caricature Chernyshevskii's opinions (Vladimir
Nabokov: A Critical Study of the Novels [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984],
64-100).
60. Davydov (1992, 418) makes this point in general terms: "Nabokov also seems
to continue Pushkin's experiments with the hybrid genre. Entire sections of the novel
are written in verse form, overt and concealed, which makes Dar a generic cousin of
Pushkin's 'novel in verse.'"