Novels of Obsession Discussion: Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov

This week, we continue our debate over different interpretations of Pale Fire-- and whether or not it even matters! We also discuss Jean Walton's reading of Kinbote's "transparent closet", and briefly touch on J.K. Rowling, Kanye, and the increasing tendency of artists to add to their work after publication.
This is the first book in our Novels of Obsession series. Want to talk about Pale Fire? Join our book club discussion here: / canonicalpod where you can also find show notes, credits and extended discussions for every episode.
You can support us by rating/liking/sharing our podcast! Subscribe to us here:
Apple | Stitcher | Spotify | Google | UA-cam
You can also support us by buying Pale Fire or another book from one of our curated lists: bookshop.org/shop/CanonicalPod. We earn a commission on every purchase and your local indie bookstore gets a cut too!
We are also on Twitter and Facebook @CanonicalPod. Follow us to get updates on upcoming episodes!

[@boq780_2.0]

Nice discussion, I am a current re-reader of this book and I think the authorship question is the key to the novel. The glimpses of something beyond the world of the characters in it are central to the book and to Nabokov himself, who valued these intimations himself in our world, though he was agnostic. The speculation draws out the patterns of coincidence and symbolism which are hidden In the novel. Like you, I agree that the solution is relatively unimportant, but the speculation is what brings out the many layers of meaning and the prismatic beauty of the book.

[@CanonicalPod]

Thanks for listening. I think Nabokov’s interest in leaving room for multiple readings comes from the same place as his distaste for psychoanalysis and bolshevism. I see him as a very individualistic writer who resisted any attempts to reduce individual experience to a matter of social class or mental type. -Eyad

[@hughtierneytierney3585]

Perhaps Walton is being to Pale Fire, what Kinbote was to Shade: she's bending the work to her own purposes. Nabokov may well have regarded her as a botfly.

[@glenreed9970]

This is excellent. So excited to find thoughtful literary analysis and discussion. Subscribed!

[@yazanasad7811]

How would you describe the novel? It wouldn't be the narrative of what happened, more the formal elements. Interesting. Much like one wouldn't want to spoil the narrative in a story, I wouldn't want to spoil the form

[@CanonicalPod]

That’s an interesting question! To me the appeal of a novel’s form is much more durable than the appeal of its plot. I’m even unsure a novel’s form could be spoiled. -Eyad