Nabokov's Final Wish
Vladimir Nabokov, author of Lolita and Pale Fire, made it clear before he died that he wished for his unpublished manuscript, The Original of Laura, to be destroyed. The manuscript now sits in a vault in a Swiss bank. Nabokov's wife failed to make a decision before she herself passed away and now that decision has fallen to Vladimir's son, Dmitri. Ben Rosenbaum has a nice article at Slate on the issue.
To me this isn't much of a decision at all. Dmitri should honor his father's wishes. Is it a tragedy that the world will never see the final genius of a revered author? Yes, but I think it would be far worse were the dying to have no final say in their legacy. Who knows why Nabokov wished the manuscript to be destroyed? His reasons are immaterial in my mind. It is his work - he gets the say in what happens to it, especially since he made it so explicitly clear. As an artist, as a dying man, and as a father, Nabokov's last desire should be fulfilled by his son. His legacy is one that will likely be eternal regardless of this final unfinished work. It's a shame but nevertheless a necessity that his final work should be committed to the flame.
(This reminds me that I need to actually read Nabokov, of whom I've read nothing. To have another lifetime to read everything I want to - if only.)
7 comments:
Don't feel bad the only reason I know who he is is because of the song 'Dont Stand So Close to Me'. :P
Buy yes, definitely should have his last wishes followed!
I agree that his dying wish should be honored, but I still have to wonder - if he REALLY didn't want anyone to see it, why didn't he destroy it himself?
I'm not calling Nabokov a narcissist (on this particular point - I think he probably was) but I could imagine that he said that to hedge against people reading this and thinking it sucked. If it was awesome, everyone wins, but if it turns out to be less awesome than Lolita, his legacy would be less, uh, awesome.
It kind of reminds me of how I feel when I write in my diary... I would be so mortified if anyone ever found it and saw what worthless drivel runs through my head. But my narcissistic side hopes that after I'm dead, someone will find it, and find meaning in it, or assign meaning to it - but just in case it's worthless drivel, none of this can happen until long after I'm dead!
and re: Don't Stand So Close to Me... It seems my mortal enemy Sting did one mildly OK thing in his life if he ever inspired someone to pick up "that book by Nabokov." I guess.
You and your mortal enemies. Is he better or worse than Phil Collins?
I agree his wishes should be honored.
I also agree that another lifetime to read what I want to would be fabulous.
Sting is way worse in my book. phil collins did ruin Genesis, but on his own he's just fine.
Ever so sorry, but I'm going to completely disagree with you on this one. So many writers asked that thier works be burned upon dying; if they truly wished this, they would have burned them themselves and they wouldn't tell someone else to do so, nor would they inform anyone of the whereabouts of the literary pieces.
Upon his death, Kafka asked Max Brod to burn his entire works, and fortunately for the world of literature, Brod did not honor his friend's wishes, (which is lucky for Nabokov, who was highly influenced by Kafka. I doubt Nabokov would have agreed to burn Kafka's pieces or anyone else's).
It may be a more noble act to go against the wishes of a dying man if it means giving the world something beautiful.
Interesting post - and thanks for the Slate link.
I completely agree with Anika, so many writers have tried to destroy their work! Gogol, for instance. As Bulgakov said, manuscripts don't burn - or at least shouldn't.
Besides, I have a completely selfish reason for wanting Nabokov's work disclosed - I am completely, irrevocably in love with him. I highly encourage everyone who can read to read "Lolita".
Post a Comment