Nabokov
What is Nabokov's ultimate goal in "Good Readers and Good Writers"?
What message/purpose is he trying to convey?
Any responses and/or any questions regarding this piece
should go in this thread.
posted by D. Robin @ 8/27/2007
11 comments
11 Comments:
Woot, 1st post!
Anyways, going over the reading in class on Monday really opened my eyes to just how meaningful the piece truly was. While I did notice certain oddities such as the use of "stuff" as well as the seemingly confusion language right after the expression that such language is not neccessary, I realized through Robin's explanation of his markings and of the text how great this class might turn out to be, and how much power exists in the words that some read quite casually. Thanks Mr. R!
- Craig Nelson
The message that I received as an audience was both the writer and the reader need to put forth an equal amount of imagination to create a new story. A good author can paint a scene with words and it is the responsibility of a good reader to return the favor by using his imagination. Many readers, myself included, tend to judge a book by its cover. To become a good reader, one must combine “a scientific coolness of judgment” with an “artist’s passion,” meaning it’s okay to have numerous personal opinions, but also try to identify with the message that the writer is trying to say. I agreed with Nobokov when he mentioned that the best readers are rereaders because whenever I reread a book, I always notice something new that I missed the previous times I read it. By rereading, we come to appreciate the author’s message much more.
-Sanny Lin
I agree with Craig. Reading your annotations really helped me to understand both the piece and the purpose of annotating. I tend to get a little ferocious in my fervor to annotate, and end up underlining too much. However, in the future I think I’ll be able to mark the text more purposefully.
To address your question, the purpose of Nabokov’s writing was to help readers enjoy literature for the right reasons and in the right way. Specifically, he probably wants readers to enjoy his writing in the above criteria. (In which he has succeeded; as soon as I have time enough, I’m going to go read Lolita again.) Also, there’s a certain unstated irony in this essay; he, the writer, counsels the reader as to how to read, and writers how to write! He even employs his very text, down to the punctuation, to convey subtle messages to subconsciously persuade us.
On another note: what other Nabokov novels would you recommend? I just love his intricate, carefully crafted imagery; it's choreographed like a dance.
Marie Cannes
At first, I was not looking forward to annotating four pages. But as I got into it, I realized the text, although it was not what I was used to reading, it really interesting. Nabokov explained what I already do as a reader in a way that gave it more meaning. It made me proud of some of my reading habits and how I re-read texts sometimes.
I became even more impressed with Nabokov when Mr. Robin started giving examples of how in his writings, Nabokov was sort of training you self-consciously to be a good reader. I didn’t catch onto that as I was reading, but when Mr.Robin brought it up it became more apparent to me. I really liked that. It really gets your brain ticking when you make connections that you didn’t realize the first time around.
:D
Allison Goodin
Personally, I disliked this piece. I think reading is a very personal thing, and to tell me that I'm doing it wrong, have been doing it wrong for all my life, is insulting more than anything. Sure one can always make suggestions to others, but I am dissuaded by those who try to force their beliefs on people. Whats so wrong with trying to learn from fiction?? It can be a more interesting, less complicated way of learning about historical times and events. And really, who is Nabokov to tell me what to do? I need a bit more of an ethical appeal from him to persuade me to think that he is any more correct that my previous teachers because according to him, they have all been wrong with their attempts to connect reading and one's personal life. I can appreciate the introduction to and expanation of annotation, but in terms of content, I disagree with a lot of it.
Shaina Cavazos
Nabokov's goal is to elaborate on how to write, but purposely using incorrect devices at inappropriate times. He puts in his reader and author embrace metaphor just as he references Cicero. To a good reader it makes no sense, he is trying to prove is point right there. He also switches which pronouns he uses, he bounces back and forth from 1st to 3rd and back to 1st. Good writers should not include these, but Nabokov throws them in to tech by example. Nabokov also talks about rereading literature multiple times. I procrastinated on my annotating, and I waited until after I had read the Scarlet Letter to annotate. While I was annotating I realized how obvious Hawthorne referenced Dimsdale being the lover, and Chillingsworth being Hester's husband. If you ever do not understand a piece, take Nabokov's advice and push through the work of reading the words, then go back and read the piece for meaning.
- Rob Rademacher (
The same thing that happened to Craig happened to me. When I read and annotated at home, I was SO confused. Nabokov was using words that didn't make sense to me for him to be using as an accomplished writer. They seemed so elementary and he would use the first person! But then when we talked about it in class something clicked and FINALLY I understood what rhetoric was. Before I had a vague idea but then I saw, it's like a secret code. I love it!
-Vanessa Vanderzee
Nabakov’s piece demonstrated what good writing should be, while telling the reader what good reading and writing really is. I think that he is hoping to improve his audience not only so they can understand his piece, but other writers as well. Although the purpose may have been meant to be uplifting, to me it was an incredible downer. I feel like I will never be able to read and write like that and while reading it I couldn’t even remember why I liked English in the first place. As I finished I thought sarcastically, well great, all I need to do is learn how to read with my spine and I’ll be good, glad I know how to do that one.
Nabokov was very sly in his crafting of "Good Readers and Good Writers." His purpose is obvious, it is stated in the title. He expounds upon this title when he says that he intends to create everyone who reads the piece into a great reader/writer. The irony comes into play during the metaphor of how physically laborious reading is compared to studying a painting. This sentence, being the longest one in the piece, proves his point to you! So, whether or not you choose to accept Nabokov's suggestions, you cannot deny the reality of the metaphor he created.
In this Nabokov establishes a sort of ethos for himself; he proved himself to the reader. If he is able to make a proven point, maybe his other suggestions are also valid...
In reply to Marie’s comment, I completely agree with you that Nabokov wrote as if choreographing a dance. That’s exactly what we’ve been talking about in class. I can relate to the dance aspect of it because we are taught to express the music through movement. Each movement is therefore purposeful.
Also, I have to admit that when I first read Nabokov’s work, I thought it was stupid that we were reading about how to read and yadda yadda yadda. Then the next day in class I was shocked! He had meaning behind everything, and I was too stubborn to catch his tricks.
Oh, and Nessa: I totally get what you mean by how rhetoric is a secret code. It’s always there and staring you straight in the face. It’s like the ketchup bottle you can never find in the refrigerator and then someone points out that its smack dab on the shelf right in front of your face! After reading “Soldier’s Home” I was proud to see that I was picking up on this secret code even though most of it was pretty obvious. (How many times can Hemmingway repeat “I like, I like I like,” or “He does not want, he does not want, he does not want.” It became rather annoying, actually.)
Anyway, I think that Nabokov pointed out that even though we all know how to read, we also don’t. Sure, it is all a matter of opinion whether to choose to believe him or not, but he points out that there is always room for improvement. That’s why we have to continue to read throughout our life. We can only become better, but if we neglect ourselves of that chance, we may deprive ourselves of our intellectual potential.
Michelle Larson
Karalyn Chen
The one thing I really liked from the piece is that stories are lies, and that the best stories are lies. I thought that was a interesting thought, because the word "lies" is usually used in a negative context, but now it has a good connotation as well.
I also liked the idea of a good reader being a rereader. I've noticed in that past that when I read a book again, I always pick up on something new. I just never made the connection to the rereading idea.
<< Home