Chekhov’s Mistess

Do You Mean What You Say, Or Say What You Mean?

Mentioned in this post: Nabokov, T.S. Eliot, Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland & Through The Looking Glass, Children’s Literature that isn’t, The Uses of Enchantment.

I probably overuse the phrase “literature is a conversation.” What I mean is that the “great” literature of the world is a continuation, a furthering, a deepening of the relationship between a writer and everything that came before it. Without that, reading and writing would be meaningless. For some of us, that conversation can seem a frenetic burden when you are sitting over at the kiddie table, trying to listen in. So, that as it is, I was reading the introduction to the Annnotated Lolita and ran across, among other things, to a reference to Nabokov’s regard for Alice in Wonderland. I began to think about the connection between T.S. Eliot, the “March Hare,” and other serious references to Alice, and wondered why it had never dawned on me to read it. So I did.

We have a couple of copies in the house (Lynn was an English major and is a Children’s lit expert), so I picked it up, knowing that it was already very much a part of my consciousness. I was curious, but low in expectations. You’ve guessed by now that I loved it (actually not completely done with because I’ve been doing TypePad stuff), but it’s really amazing! It is a constant riff of word play, involution and irony and metaphor. And yes, the references to things familiar are fun too.

I’m just now getting an idea of the depth in so-called children’s literature that those of us who like “serious” literature, at least me, took for granted. [I have a seven month old, so it’s a bit early, but he already has Sandra Boynton’s oeuvre under his belt and the fact that he doesn’t immediately try to eat them seems to indicate his approval. Even though it’s beside the point of this writing, it’s worth mentioning that my favorite is Not the Hippopotamus.] Lynn introduced me to Shel Silverstein – The Giving Tree is a poignant story and far more meaningful to the parent than the child.  I will soon dust off my old copy of The Little Prince, which my mother gave me, and so on as I delve into this part of the “conversation.”

Hearing of my new interest, a friend recommended Bruto Bettelheim’s The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales, which I have not yet seen. And I have long been a fan, particularly through Italo Calvino’s anthology, of folktales, which might be the genesis of what we think of as fairy tales.

So it would seem that the best of this lot is not necessarily for children (A recent Bookforum article on Hans Christian Anderson comes to mind, but I can’t find the issue. It said that his stories were not at all for children, but were perverted through the mores of the day and translation into the form that we are aware of now). Perhaps too, this idea extends into adult literature. Haddon’s The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time comes to mind, and J.D. Salinger must have known while writing Holden’s Adventure’s in Wonderland, what Tolkien did: that in youth exists a pure voice where the world’s hypocrisies are exposed.

None of this comes as a surprise, except for, at least to me, the fact that this stuff is really great literature. Perhaps all those in favor of graphic novels should have a look at some children’s books. More on all this later, and perhaps we’ll have Lynn as a guest blogger on the subject of Children’s lit that isn’t, and her fascination, which I do not share, with Harry Potter. She’s already in my ear talking about Roald Dahl, so I guess we’ll have to have her on soon.

p.s. Foreward has a link to some manuscript images of the precursor to Alice that look interesting.

Books Mentioned:


Amazon.com: Books: The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time (Vintage Contemporaries)” href=“http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1400032717/qid=1090034031/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/104-2229159-9088749”>

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time (Vintage Contemporaries)

This is the Norton Critical Edition, which I am reading for the notes.
Amazon.com: Books: The Giving Tree” href=“http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060256656/qid=1090035796/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/104-2229159-9088749”>

The Giving Tree


Amazon.com: Books: Inventions of the March Hare: Poems 1909-1917” href=“http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0151002746/qid=1090035904/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/104-2229159-9088749?v=glance&s=books”>

Inventions of the March Hare: Poems 1909-1917


Amazon.com: Books: BUT NOT THE HIPPOPOTAMUS” href=“http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671449044/qid=1090036042/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/104-2229159-9088749?v=glance&s=books”>

BUT NOT THE HIPPOPOTAMUS

comments

I’m curious, was the connection related to Carroll’s probably pedophilic urges toward the “real” Alice?

    – M (07/22  at  02:59 PM)

Carroll’s personal life does indeed inform his writing, but not necessarily the aspect of pedophilia you mention.  Not everyone agrees with this. Phyllis Greenacre, in her essay “Reconstruction and Interpretation of the development of Charles L. Dodgson and Lewis Carroll” addresses Dodgson’s attraction to girls along with phallic symbolism, etc.

What I think is most interesting about Dodgson’s personal life is that he was a logician and compulsive person, which, according to some of the pieces I’ve read, account for his ability to create such a nonsensical world with its own set of logic. So you can see my approach tends toward the aesthetic and not the symbolic.

In terms of any connection between Dodgson’s personal life and Lolita, I would have to say absolutely not. The depth of Nobokov’s thinking and literary knowledge would easily preclude the idea that he would draw upon that for a novel like Lolita. I think that Lolita is merely the story around which far deeper themes are developed. For instance, Nabokov drew upon Edgar Allan Poe, particularly Annabelle Lee and Keat’s La Belle Dame Sans Merci for nymph/child/love/femme fatale elements, just as a couple examples out of the myriad cited in the annotations. The only relationship is literary, in my view, but again, you could cite examples to the contrary, at least in terms of Dodgson’s symbolistic allusion to his urges. The mushroom is a sex symbol in some cultures, and Alice eats mushroom for the purposes of transformation. In Lolita, which thematically is a story of transformation, mushrooms are also mentioned, although not necessarily in a sexual manner.

- Bud Parr

    – Chekhov's Mistress (07/23  at  07:50 PM)

Hi. I’m a student at the University of Puerto Rico. I’m doing research for my thesis which will be about the images of females and how they’ve evolved. I will be concentrating on the characterization of the nymphette in Nabokov’s Lolita and how Humbert gives Lolita atributes of both la belle dame sans merci and la femme fatale. Any information or coment is welcome.

Thank you.

My email address is: adriana_i_santiago@hotmail.com

    – Adriana I. Santiago (10/19  at  02:17 PM)

Page 1 of 1 pages of comments

Next entry: Book Lottery Numbers
Previous entry: Moved to TypePad

« Back to main

About this Post

• Posted by: Bud Parr
• Date: July 16, 2004
• Filed Under:
  Wise Men Fish Here: Literature

• Comments:3
• Links to this Post: Technorati

Recommended Links

- top -