Very sincerely yours,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: GEORGE WEIDENFELD
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, September 25, 1962
Palace Hotel
Dear George,
We are back in Montreux. I notice with dismay that another London publisher has published somebody's novel under the title of BEND SINISTER.1
I read with pleasure your remarks on PALE FIRE. On the other hand I am perturbed by the fact that you published that vicious Soviet stooge Aragon's History of Russian Revolution, falsified with the gleeful aid of the Soviets themselves.
I want to ask a favor of you: clippings. I am buying regularly Observer, S. Times, S. Telegraph, S. Express, D. Express, D. Mail, N. Statesman, Spectator, Punch and Encounter. I wonder if you could supply me with cuttings from the rest?
The weather here is blue and silver, and we have a charming new flat here at this hotel.
Best regards,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: WILLIAM MCGUIRE1
TLS (XEROX), 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
January 15, 1963
Dear Mr. McGuire,
Many thanks for your kind letter of January 11 and the delightful Epiphany gift of page proofs vol. 3 right through Ap. 2. I also thank you for agreeing to do a separatum of that Appendix. I am enclosing the prefatory note with the proposed title-page.
I would by no means object to your selling or sending out copies of the Notes on Prosody.2 Would you be so kind as to send copies to the following:
University Libraries (Cornell, Harvard, Berkeley, Wellesley, Columbia, Stanford, Oxford, Cambridge and London), NYL, BM, BN (any others?); periodicals: The New Yorker, New Republic, Encounter, Times Lit. Suppl. (no others); people (if this is not asking too much): Harry T. Levin (14 Kirkland PL, Cambridge), Morris Bishop, 903 Wyckoff Rd., Ithaca, NY, Edmund Wilson, do The New Yorker, 25 W. 43, NYC.
For myself I would be happy to have 20–25 copies.
I have practically finished reading the page proofs of vol. 1 (with prelims) and vol. 2, and they will be in BW's3 hands next week. Alas, the inevitable has happened. That little virgin has been left too long with the shipwrecked sailor on Christmas Island, and in result the beautiful and once intact page proofs of my translation of the poem have undergone a number of changes. Not only have I now achieved almost total literalism, but I have managed to match every recurrent epithet of Pushkin's with a recurrent English one (except in such cases of course where another shade of sense in the hard-working Russian word required a different English epithet). If possible I would like to check the revised page proofs of the translation (only).
Upon BW's advice I bought a repulsive-looking stamping machine and used it to number the 5000 cards of my Index; it had a very sick six, it made a thunderous thump, and at the start of every new century it would muff the last three digits. Two hefty chaps from Kramer Brothers4 came for the three boxes, and since January 3 a girl has been taking pictures of sets of four cards. Every other day I have been dropping in to inquire if l'lndex n'a pas froid, etc., but the people here don't understand jokes. The photostats will be ready and cut up after tomorrow.
My wife joins me in wishing you, BW and EO a very happy New Year.
As ever,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: PASCAL COVICI
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
February 23, 1963
Dear Pat,
I liked very much NOTES FROM A BOTTLE FOUND ON A BEACH AT CARMEL. It is an elegant blend of inspiration and information. But while it is a pleasure to express my admiration, I am obliged to warn you that what I have just said about Mr. Connell's book is not for quotation.1 I am emphatically against blurbs penned by friendly fellow-writers. I have been often asked to contribute quotable lines and have always refused, and of course I cannot make an exception in this case. Incidentally, my latest books are as free of these ornaments as were my very first ones.
Yours very cordially,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: GEORGE WEIDENFELD
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
March 30, 1963
Dear George,
I have your letter of March 28th (to Vera) and the books. Since you are so eager about it I shall certainly sign a copy of the paperback LAUGHTER IN THE DARK for Sir Allen Lane.1 I want to put on record, however, that I find the cover design of this edition atrocious, disgusting and badly drawn besides having nothing to do whatever with the contents of the book. I would appreciate if you would use your influence and have them substitute a pretty dark-haired girl, or a palmtree, or a winding road, or anything else for this tasteless abomination. In any case, please show them this letter. And please do put it in your future contracts with them that I have to be consuited about cover designs. The one they put on NABOKOV'S DOZEN was pretty bad and insulting, but this one is the limit.
Cordially yours,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: GERMANO FACETTI1
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, April 13, 1963
Palace Hotel
Dear Sir,
Thank you for the opportunity you gave me of seeing the proposed cover for INVITATION TO A BEHEADING.
I think a cover should have some aesthetic appeal. Mr. André François' macrocephalic homunculus has none. Moreover, I object to the style he has chosen with its, by now academic, simplifications and distortions. I am returning your sketch and am sending you another one.2 It is in the spirit of the book and translates some of its poetical quality (which is absent from the pseudochildish drawing you sent me). I would be happy if you could use it as it is. If there exists some technical reason against using it, then at least you will have a clear idea of what I want for this book.
Yours truly,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: WILLIAM MCGUIRE
TLS (XEROX), 1 p.
Montreux, May 26, 1963
Dear Mr. McGuire,
I have nothing against Edmund Wilson's immersing himself, as you say, in the final revised, or revised final, page proofs of my EO; but he should not be made to immerse himself in one puddle at a time. He should have the whole torrent at his disposal.
Any reader of the Commentary (vol. 2 and vol. 3) must have before him vol. 1 (Introduction and Translation) and vol. 4 (Appendixes, Original Text and Index). A work of this kind cannot be studied piecemeal, and a critic of Wilson's kind should not be deprived of the task and pleasure of comparing the translation with the 1837 text (which he does not have in his library) or of consulting the index (without which he could not track down certain short poems mentioned in the commentary).
I do not want to exert undue pressure on you but I am convinced that for a serious study a reviewer must have the entire text on his desk before him. I therefore suggest that we wait until we can supply Edmund Wilson with the final version of the complete text, and only in case of an insuperable craving give him at least vol. 1 (complete and revised), vol. 2 (ditto) and the 1837 Russian text in page proof, all in one batch. You do not have my blessing for this course but only my very reluctant agreement.
I would like to add that I do not believe that a distinguished critic's review (or indeed any review) helps to sell a book. Readers are not sheep, and not every pen (pun) tempts them. Some of my best flops had been ushered in by extravagant (albeit well deserved) praise from eminent critics. The only thing that is of some help to the commercial success of a book (apart from topicality or sexuality) is a sustained advertising campaign, lots of ads everywhere.
This leads me to another consideration. During the last years publishers have been steadily sending me novels (mainly powerful ones with dirty dialogue) for endorsements, and these I have steadily refused to give. In some cases I notice with dismay that the authors had endorsed my own books in the past. So a couple of years ago I wrote Walter Minton of a great decision I had taken, in consequence of which the jackets of PALE FIRE and THE GIFT are
without endorsements. I am afraid I must also ask you not to quote any friendly opinions in the jacket of my EO.
Yours ever,
Vladimir Nabokov
Could you make me a present? I would love to possess Huntington Cairns' critical anthology THE LIMITS OF ART.1
TO: WILLIAM MCGUIRE
TLS (XEROX), 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
June 14, 1963
Dear Mr. McGuire,
I am worried by the reference to "aspersions" in your letter of June 10. I do not have my text here but whatever "aspersions" I cast on the Deutsch-Elton-Radin-Spalding versions, they should not be diluted. Please, send me my text of the "aspersions". As far as I remember that passage, it was a very important one, and it should remain tel quel. Why on earth should I spare the feelings of Babette, Dorothea, Oliver and the gallant Henry'S.—or of their publishers?
I also object to my being "grateful for permission to quote" them and Edmund Wilson. Why can't I quote if I like? Please explain this to me. It sounds awfully mawkish. To whom am I "grateful"? "Grateful" is a big word. And anyway, if unavoidable, all these acknowledgements should be made by my publishers and not by me. In answer to your other suggestions:
Acknowledgement to Houghton.1 OK.
Credit BW2 for his work: In the Vol. 1 foreword (and I, too, should receive some credit for the Index).
"A photographic reproduction," etc.—OK.
But my aspersions should be treasured, not "diluted".
Yours ever,
Vladimir Nabokov
Copy to Mrs. Warren
Yes, I would like to see the "brilliant" translation of Walter Arndt3—whoever that is—but will not mention his work—whatever its worth.
TO: BART WINER
CC, 2 pp.
Palace Hotel
Montreux, Suisse
August 21 st, 1963
Dear Mr. Winer,
I have just received your kind letter of Aug. 19, 1963. Sorry—I emphatically object to deleting most of the epithets you list. This is a matter of principle. Omitting them would mean admitting censorship—and censorship is the villain of my book. If a paraphrase is ridiculous and if an illustration is monstrous, I will say so. I will not give in. I will summon Pushkin's ghost to fight Elton's poltergeist. Indeed, I regret very much having allowed some of my kittens to be altered during the copy preparation; in a few cases the stylistic considerations suggested to me were valid and these prevailed—since the moral strictures were safely tucked up elsewhere.
Taking up the matter specifically, I wish, first, to establish that the dead cannot take legal action against the quick. Spalding, Elton, and Brodski are no more with us. This eliminates five of the fifteen quibbles (Elton's triteness, 2463; his being inimitable 34; Spalding's inability to write poetry 3185; the character of Elton's versification 3187; and Brodski's political servility; 3363). Secondly: since nobody took legal action several years ago when the passages in question first appeared in print, i.e. in the articles I published in American and Russo-American literary reviews, it is highly unlikely that any action would be, or could be, taken now. This eliminates three more of the remaining ten quibbles (Foreword, p. 3, "unfortunately": see my article on Problems of Translation, Part. Rev. 1956, p. 506; Miss Deutsch's incredible coyness, 2463: see P.R. 1956, p. 509; and Penguin's execrable Candide: see the notes to my Servile Path in Brower's collection.1 We have seven left. The two items 2112 and 2424 (asking for the omission of "ridiculous" and "ludicrously" would, if agreed to, make my text absurd; and item 3234 ("grotesque achievement") has already been pruned once and should not be pruned any more. My criticism of the infamous EO illustrations in 3353 is so dear to me that I would prefer giving up the publication of my entire work rather than surrendering that passage. This leaves us with three, and only three items, and these may be modified if really desirable, namely 2186 (substituting "misleading" for "atrocious") 2285 (omitting "unbelievable nonsense"), and 2286 (omitting "and hideously").
Your—or rather Bollingen's—letter is very upsetting. I would like those lawyers of theirs to give me a single instance when a literary critic's describing a translator's mistake as "ridiculous" or "atrocious" or "nonsensical" ever lead to legal action on the part of that translator or of his publisher, or of their associated shades.
You should have received the rest of the index by now.
Thanks for the Note of Acknowledgement and the Headnote, but please delete the word "perhaps" which is ambiguous and superfluous. The Note heading the Commentary is OK.
My wife is in Zurich (Plaza Hotel) but I hope that she will be back here in a couple of days. We would be delighted to spend an evening at the Montreux-Palace with Miss Gillmor and Mr. Barrett.
I regret very much that I cannot come to London. I have cancelled my television engagement there; but thanks all the same.
Yours ever,
Vladimir Adamant Nabokov
Copy to William McGuire
TO: THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, August 24, 1963
Palace Hotel
Sir,
I cannot resist correcting a cruel misprint in your caption (August 18, 1963, page 3) under the photograph of King George V, Tsar Nicolas II, and his son, the Tsarevich. The inadvertent substitution of "Tovarich" for the last word is especially distressing in view of the fact that it was indeed a tovarishch ("comrade" in the Bolshevist sense) who a few years later was to murder the poor little boy.
Yours truly,
Vladimir Nabokov
TO: AL LEVIN1
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, September 13, 1963
Palace Hotel
Dear Mr. Levin,
My husband asks me to thank you for your letter of September 9. He has not seen the article in Nugget, which makes it difficult for him to answer your letter. At the time he was writing LOLITA he studied a considerable number of case histories ("real" stories) many of which have more affinities with the LOLITA plot than the one mentioned by Mr. Welding. The latter is mentioned also in the book LOLITA. It did not inspire the book. My husband wonders what importance could possibly be attached to the existence in "real" life of "actual rape abductions" when explaining the existence of an "invented" book. He is particularly curious as regards the meaning of Mr. Welding's statement about "a shrewd maneuver to provide himself legal protection." Legal protection against what?
Had he read Mr. Welding's article, my husband might have been able to give you more pertinent comment although he fails to see what importance that article could possibly have.
Sincerely yours,
(Mrs. Vladimir Nabokov)
TO: JACK DALTON1
TLS (XEROX), 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
October 15, 1963
Dear Mr. Dalton,
In answer to your kind letter of September 21, my husband asks me to say that he thinks ULYSSES by far the greatest English novel of the century but detests FINNEGANS WAKE "whose obscenities when deciphered are not justified by the commonplace myths and silly anecdotes they laboriously mask."
He very much regrets that the amount of work already lined up for the next year or two does not allow him to undertake the writing of an article on this subject.
Sincerely yours,
(Mrs. Vladimir Nabokov)
TO: STANLEY EDGAR HYMAN1
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
December 15, 1963
Dear Mr. Hyman,
My husband asks me to thank you for your letter of Nov. 19 and for sending him a copy of your review in The New Leader.2
He also thanks you for inviting him to speak or read at Bennington College. To his great regret he cannot accept it because he plans only a very short stay in the East.
Regarding your kind and admirable review: We do not think we have much chance of convincing you that my husband has no Oedipus complex; that Fyodor's mother is not his mother; that Zina has no resemblance to me; or that
my husband has enough good taste never to put his wife, or his courtship, in his novels. After all, it would only be our word against Freud's. But one thing my husband would like to ask you. Who was your "consultant in Russian literature"? We strongly suspect that this person was pulling your leg—if he or she exists. It is a matter of historic record (and even Freud could do nothing about it) that my husband never signed any poems or indeed anything else with the name "Godunov-Cherdyntsev". (Are you sure your consultant did not confuse this name with that of a minor poet Golenishtshev-Kutuzov?). And it is of course absurd to equate Koncheev with Khodasevich, a much older man whose reputation had been well established before the Revolution.
Sincerely yours,
(Mrs. Vladimir Nabokov)
TO: BYRON DOBELL
CC, 1 p.
Montreux, Switzerland
January 8, 1964
Dear Mr. Dobell,
I have given much thought to the highly attractive and flattering offer (in your letter of Dec. 27) to take the place of Miss Dorothy Parker whose admiring reader I have been for many years.1
Vladimir Nabokov: Selected Letters 1940-1977 Page 31
