Most Helpful Customer Reviews
12 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
No Doubts about THE MAGICIAN'S DOUBTS, it is a Valuable Work, March 27, 2000
This review is from: The Magician's Doubts (Paperback)
I've been reading Nabokov for about 27 years, and re-reading it just as long, including almost every novel, short story, essay, and criticism I could find, as well as the Boyd two-volume biography, to which the previous customer referred. While Boyd's work is thorough and might be called "definitive," Wood's book is purposefully limited in scope. However, I certainly found in-depth analyses of the points and themes Wood chose. The subtitle of this book should also inform the prospective reader, i.e., "Nabokov and the Risks of Fiction." The book is made up of relatively short (the entire paperback is only about 250 pages), somewhat overlapping critical analyses regarding a specific point in six of VN's novels, two short stories, and his translation of EUGENE ONEGIN. Perhaps a few examples from the table of contents will help clarify: 3. The Cruelty of Chance: BEND SINISTER, 'Signs and Symbols', 'The Vane Sisters'; 4. The World Without Us: SPEAK MEMORY; 5. The Language of LOLITA; 8. The Demons of our Pity: PALE FIRE; 9. Happy Families: ADA. I have underlined so much of Wood's text and written so much in the margins that it is difficult to pick out a single example that might illuminate Wood's approach. But here's a try: In "The Language of LOLITA" Wood approaches the novel from Nabokov's games and play with language, and uses them to go into the many oppositions, ironies, and mysteries that abound in the book. For example, Wood cites the passage, "No matter, even if those eyes of hers would swell to myopic fish, and her nipples swell and crack...even then I would still go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your dear wan face, at the mere sound of your raucous voice, my Lolita." Wood notes the apposition of "wan" and "raucous"; and then goes on with his analysis (within the context of this and other previous essays), "[these] are the notations of desperate love, and Humbert writes here the purest, most precise Nabokovian prose. What we question is not [Humbert's] passion but his supposed new respectability. The whole of [LOLITA] has been asking us to trust Humbert's obsession, even as we are repelled by it. We can't leave off trusting it now...[when the obsession] is so lyrically mourning what it claims it won't miss." Wood goes on to say that it may not be necessary for us to believe what Humbert believes at the end. "Indeed we may understand his crime more fully if we are sceptical about his repentence and altered love...It is easy to confess...and it may actually be to Humbert's credit that he is not entirely convincing in this line, in spite of his ambitions." These critical essays clearly are not meant to go into deep and thorough dissertations of a given work by Nabokov. Rather, I feel Wood is trying to give an overview of Nabokov by examining these particular works, each with a different, purposefully limited thesis. Wood may offend some Nabokov lovers perhaps because he does point out specific places in which he finds VN's prose and/or approach lacking or perhaps too gamesy for its own good. On the whole, however, I found Wood's book an excellent example of literary criticism "dedicated to the appreciation and interpretation of a single author, addressed to the general reader," to quote David Lodge from THE NEW YORK TIMES REVIEW OF BOOKS. I am also in agreement with John Banville of THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, who writes, "[Wood's book] offers us an entirely new set of insights into the work of a modern master." I feel this book is a MUST for the reader who is, say, on his/her second or third book by Nabokov. Yet I would also recommend MAGICIAN'S DOUBTS to anyone who is thoroughly familiar with Nabokov's life, his work, and its criticism for a fresh, cogent look at some of VN's work. I found it an especially good book for aspiring writers, as Wood dissects many of Nabokov's techniques, such as the way VN uses inversion, the use of connected references to accrue power, surface detail to reveal the object's depth, and how VN maintains the mystery in his work without losing its narrative drive. For myself, I most enjoyed reading THE MAGICIAN'S DOUBTS with the subject of each chapter (i.e., the particular Nabokov work) alongside, re-examining with delight the points and overall themes Wood expresses so elegantly in this compact but dense-with-insight book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
8 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Sorry, but I must say......, April 15, 2000
I really feel that the first review I wrote was not specific enough, and for that I do apologize. As a long time rereader of Nabokov, the thing that MOST glaringly turned me off about Mr. Wood's book was his propensity to incorrectly refer to the original Nabokov text. (Example: On page 208 Wood writes, "...and the word [incest] hovers in the children's Scrabble games (insect, scient, incest)..." The incest, scient, nicest word play is on page 85 of the Vintage editon. Ada is playing anagrams with her governess on pencil and paper. The Scrabble game enters the novel on page 223 and the ensuing game makes no reference to incest. I know it seems a nitpicky criticism, but the detail is all.) I opened with his chapter on Ada, as that was the book I was most involved in, and was immediately turned off by his lack of precision. I skimmed some of his critique of the short stories, but then gave up on the whole thing. When writing the previous review, I believed that any attentive Nabokovian would agree with me, but it appears I have erred, and possibly offended. I must admit that even Mr. Boyd gave Mr. Wood a certain amount of credit as a scholar in the opening of his most recent book. So...so I've reread the Ada chapter and looked at a few other chapters and I still can't bring my self to think that's this book is good for much more than helping me solidify my opinions of VN's work by refuting about 95% of Wood's arguements. Apologies for my too strong condemnation, it was ridiculous, but I still do not like this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
I love this book!, December 30, 1999
This book is great. Wood is an absolute genius.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
|
