On Thursday, Sarah discussed that she was revolving between two different topics explored in her blog for her final paper. The first being homosexuality in Pale Fire and the connections to the myth of Orpheus, as well as to Proust and Socrates; the second, of Echo and Narcissus as the revolving myth around which to interpret the structure of mirrors and reflection in Nabokov’s art.
As we have come to learn, everything in Pale Fire is relevant to EVERYTHING. It is no an imposition for us to make connections between two entities of a seemingly distant nature (“feigned remoteness”). So how could I be surprised to stumble upon an essay that directly links the myth of Narcissus and narcissism to homosexuality in Kinbote’s character and, more importantly, the art of Nabokov.
In the chapter ‘Queer, Queer Vladimir’ from his book Reflecting Narcissus: a queer aesthetic, Steven Bruhm relates the desire of sameness to an inherently narcissistic persona. Through the achievement of or engagement in sameness, or homosexuality, one simultaneously relegates oneself to the periphery of acceptable social behavior. The desire for sameness produces an insurmountable difference, as Kinbote constantly experiences.
“What we think of as homophobia is often really heterophobia, the fear of difference…For Nabokov, narcissism is as much a national expression of homophobia as it is a sexual psychodynamic” (Sedgwick in Bruhm).
Kinbote’s recollections and commentary on “Shade’s poem” are so narrow and convoluted, we realize, because he is interpreting the world through a narcissistic lens. The lens of the artist.
“Narcissism is unhealthy when a person's entire behaviour, be it fair or foul, is geared towards ensuring others meet their needs and justify their belief in their inflated self image. This self image is a "false self" and it can be extremely pleasant, charming and intoxicating covering a multitude of insecurities and bad traits” (echo.me.uk).
The “false self” or image of Charles the Beloved is constructed as a guise for Kinbote’s insanity (or Botkin’s genius). Is not every single line of the poem twisted somehow in the commentary to serve some purpose of Kinbote’s? Shade is reflected upon in the poem, but is displaced as the speaker by Kinbote.
“Kinbote uses external objects--other people, Shade's poem--"in the service of the self and of the maintenance of its instinctual investment." Indeed, this instinctual investment is figured in a scene that literally appropriates the Narcissus myth: having escaped revolutionary Zembla, Charles traverses the countryside in a red sweater. His supporters stymie the Shadows by donning red sweaters as well, so that the real king cannot be detected in the context of widespread public masquerade (one thinks here of the King of Norway who, along with his subjects, wore Stars of David to confuse the Nazis). However, there is some suggestion that the villainous Gradus too may be wearing a red sweater, and so the enemy and the hero have become indistinguishable. During the escape, Charles comes to a pond and, looking into it, first sees a "counterfeit king" reflected--who is actually, he then realizes, standing on the ledge above him. This reflection--either enemy or supporter or self--soon gives way to "a genuine reflection, much larger and clearer than the one that had deceived him" (143)” (excerpted from Bruhm).
That instance is perhaps the most literal allusion to the Narcissus myth, but reflection, in both the literal and suggestive sense, engulfs the novel. As Bruhm points to in another fascinating discovery that I can’t help but share:
“Kinbote "resembles" not only King Charles but also Gradus, the revolutionary murderer with whom he shares a birthday, a homeland, and a physiognomy (all Zemblans look alike). The King's bedroom mirror, the very signifier of his identity, was made by Sudarg of Bokay, "Jacob Gradus" spelled backwards (111). The word "kinbote," we are told, is Zemblan for "regicide" (267). And in a way, Kinbote's distortion of Shade's poem kills the author as Jack Gray kills the man”.
Of course, reflection is alluded to in the first two haunting lines of the poem:
I was the shadow of the waxwing slain
By the false azure in the windowpane
If we think of shadows as a type of duplication, extension, or reflection of the self (after all, it is literally a projection of oneself), then you can see these two lines as a direct metaphor for a reflection in the water. The azure in the windowpane is analogous to a blue body of water, and it is false because a window reflects like a body of water, yet it is not. It is an illusion. A huge, gaping illusion. And perhaps, the most vulnerable, stripped bare reflection in the entirety of Pale Fire.
After reading Pale Fire, it becomes clear that reflection is not merely an element of the novel…it IS the novel.
At this point, I can’t help but feel that the entire novel revolves around these two lines. That the entire novel—all the identities of Kinbote, questions of the true author, the circles that we are lead in, and the revelations that everything we are reading are mirrored constructions of some greater truth—are huge arrows pointing to these two lines, as if screaming, “It’s right here, at the very beginning, ALL of it”. After all, does not the entire rest of the novel parody and contradict itself? Constructing a tower of meaning, a labyrinth of infinite rooms, with single simple foundation for it all.
I was the shadow of the waxwing slain
By the false azure in the windowpane
No comments:
Post a Comment