Slog - Comments on If You Want Something Done Right...

Comment by PJ

PJ — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:00:36 -0800

Why didn't Nabokov do it himself then? Perhaps it is more complicated than this.

Comment by Mr. Poe

Mr. Poe — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:04:16 -0800

It's a trap!

Comment by Johnny

Johnny — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:05:42 -0800

I figure, if he has an issue with them not following his objectives, then he can sue them.

I mean seriously, the man is DEAD. If he wanted it destroyed he could have done so himself. He didn't, so the matter no longer concerns him.

Comment by COMTE

COMTE — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:10:08 -0800

Dmitri Nabokov isn't an idiot so much as he's the offspring of one of the 20th Century's most notable literary figures, who recognizes that an unpublished manuscript has some value; if not as a work of literature in-and-of itself, than at least as a possible source of income to him and his family.

Vladimir may have thought it a piece of drek, but a lot of people would still probably buy it anyway.

Comment by monkey

monkey — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:19:48 -0800

The lesson here is this... If you want something done after you die that badly then you'd better do it before you die.

Really, making someone else do it is just plain lazy, that's what that is.

Comment by monkey

monkey — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:20:30 -0800

The lesson here is this... If you want something done that badly after you die then you'd better do it yourself before you die.

Really, making someone else do it is just plain lazy, that's what that is.

Comment by monkey

monkey — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:21:38 -0800

Please ignore post #5 and go straight to #6.

Comment by Christin

Christin — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:34:06 -0800

Maybe this is undiluted cynicism, but if I were a Great Writer Of My Time who was looking to be a Great Writer Of All Time, this would be a fantastic way to inspire cult interest after my death, thus ensuring that discussion of my work continued after I was gone. "What's in the final manuscript? Why did he want it destroyed? Should it be destroyed? Let's speculate what's in it! Let's publish twenty copies and sell them for a million dollars! Let's publish twenty million copies and sell them for seven dollars! Let's never let this issue die!"

Comment by bma

bma — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:37:19 -0800

Good that Emily Dickinson's heirs did the same thing with her papers too, right?

Oh, wait...

Comment by Aislinn

Aislinn — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:43:31 -0800

@4: I highly doubt that Dmitri Nabokov is influenced by money in this decision: he's 73, is sure to have plenty of money, and has no heirs. I think it's a combination of enjoying the attention and honestly feeling torn about what to do.

This reminds me of the Kate Chopin story, "Her Letters." A wife has old letters from a lover that she can't bear to destroy herself, because they give her comfort. After his wife's death, her husband finds the bundle of letters, with a note attached saying that she trusts him to destroy them for her, unread. He follows her wishes, but wondering what was in them eventually destroys him.

Comment by Sirkowski

Sirkowski — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:46:05 -0800

The idiot here seems to be Vladimir.

Comment by WHAT WOULD DOLORES HAZE SAY?

WHAT WOULD DOLORES HAZE SAY? — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:50:53 -0800

Re Chopin's letters: I'll take the sans-serif ones - you take the ones with Polish diacritical marks.

Comment by gfish

gfish — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:54:07 -0800

Destroy the only copy of a work by one of the most famous authors of the last century? What a despicable idea. Had Vlad destroyed it himself when alive, I still would be appalled.

Comment by max solomon

max solomon — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:55:48 -0800

oh the tortured artist boo-hoo. who's the worst judge of artwork? the artist.

release the fucking manuscript - how bad could it be? and if it is truly terrible, it will barely dent nabokov's reputation. does "ebony & ivory" diminish the accomplishment of "helter skelter"? ok, bad example...

kevin shields, take note.

Comment by Nose Knows

Nose Knows — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:00:10 -0800

Yeah. And Franz Kafka, too. He wanted everything burned after he died. In his case, though, I suspect he was, in some way, proving his thoughts on human nature, knowing they probably wouldn't be.

Comment by Julie

Julie — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:13:38 -0800

Nabokov was pretty famous for only wanting his final, perfect manuscripts to be published, if I recall. So, that would lead me to think don't publish it...

But, my opinion would also be influenced by why he didn't do it himself. If it was a work in progress and he physically wasn't able to destroy it before he died, that would suggest destroying it, but, if he had a chance to do so and didn't... maybe he didn't really want it done. Also, I wonder if it was a blanket instruction (i.e., destroy all unfinished works) or specific to this work.

My husband is an author and he has said that he wants his unpublished work destroyed if he dies... but, I'm not sure if he's really thought about it or just says it because it seems like a writerly thing to say. I can see how this would be a really difficult thing for the son to decide.

Comment by also

also — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:03:31 -0800

@15

Indeed, it is only because Kafka's friend Max Brom couldn't bring himself to destroy the books that we have many of Kafka's works today.

It's undoubtedly a tough decision, but I think it is possible to feel more of a duty to society in general than to a deceased friend or relative.

Comment by r., j

r., j — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:39:15 -0800

So I'm writing a book, it's not done, it doesn't meet my own standards yet, I don't want it read until it does, I don't expect to die but I don't want anyone to read my imperfect incomplete work so I tell my heirs that if I don't publish it they can't and I die and they decide screw me I'm dead publish it. Wrong.

Comment by bokie's bitch

bokie's bitch — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:56:30 -0800

If you rearrange the letters in the actual statement Nabokov made, can you make a sentence that says, "You better not destroy this manuscript, you mindless twits"?

Comment by Paul Constant

Paul Constant — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:54:38 -0800

Oh, man, I knew that people were going to bring up Dickinson and Kafka. The difference is that Nabokov was a celebrated author who is known as a perfectionist.

The thing about really good novelists is that they're good not just because of what they put in their novels. What they leave out is just as important as what actually gets printed on the page.

For people to believe that they're somehow owed a new Nabokov novel, or that they're going to gain some sort of insight into how he works by studying a misfire of his, is ridiculous.

I can't think of a single posthumously-released novel by an established author that was worth a damn, and I guarantee that, as much as I love Nabokov, this novel will be utter shit. It's best to let it be.

Comment by Julie

Julie — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:47:14 -0800

@20. I rather liked C.S. Lewis's The Dark Tower, and that was post-humously released, unfinished. I think it was going to be a novella, though, not a novel.

That being said, destroying it is probably the thing to do, unless there's some other circumstances that we aren't aware of.

Comment by Mark at YVR

Mark at YVR — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:06:41 -0800

Call me a sucker for preserving stuff even against explicit orders--like the Eiffel Tower in 1944, tapes of waterboarding, and the White House/DOJ emails. OK, I guess I'm an idiot, just like Dmitri. Must be that damn class I took in thermodynamics.

Comment by Epimetheus

Epimetheus — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:11:49 -0800

Wikipedia says "...roughly half finished ..." "...about fifty hand-written index cards, equivalent to about thirty conventional paper manuscript pages." I'm not sure how 30 pages is a "half finished" novel, but undoubtedly it would lack the subtlety and nuance of, for example,

"Here is Virgil who could the nymphet sing in single tone, but probably preferred a lad's perineum" [Lolita; Vladimir Nabokov]

I mean just how much of that can you get on fifty index cards? It would probably be best to not publish it, but destroying it may be a bit much, since as others have said, he didn't bother to destroy it himself, perhaps the restricted collection of some university library would be a good place for it.

But who cares about 30 pages of an unfinished novel when Dmitri is still around (though he seems to have lost interest in blogspot, last post was about a year ago, but what is there is worth reading).
Maybe the Stranger could get him as a writer?

Comment by CaneMan

CaneMan — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 07:00:14 -0800

I know Dmitri and you sir are no Dimtri -- but, from all I read above, I must conclude you are an idiot!