Николай Гоголь

by Vladimir Nabokov, Владимир Набоков, Андрей Бабиков (Translator)

В 1942–1944 гг., вскоре после переезда в США, Владимир Набоков написал книгу о Николае Гоголе, превратив биографию гения в очень личное и смелое высказывание об истинном и ложном в искусстве. Знаменитые пассажи Набокова, разъясняющие американскому читателю значение слова «пошлость» и высмеивающие условности рекламы, были написаны для этой книги и до сих пор не утратили своей остроты. Несмотря на различные отступления от требований биографического жанра, «Николай Гоголь» охватывает всю творческую историю писателя, останавливается на всех поворотах его необычного жизненного пути и снабжен подробной «Хронологией» и указателем. Пронизывая собственным писател&#

Genres: Biography, Nonfiction, Russia, Russian Literature, Literary Criticism, Literature, History

246 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1944

About the author

Vladimir Nabokov (Russian: Владимир Набоков) was a writer defined by a life of forced movement and extraordinary linguistic transformation. Born into a wealthy, liberal aristocratic family in St. Petersburg, Russia, he grew up trilingual, speaking Russian, English, and French in a household that nurtured his intellectual curiosities, including a lifelong passion for butterflies. This seemingly idyllic, privileged existence was abruptly shattered by the Bolshevik Revolution, which forced the family into permanent exile in 1919. This early, profound experience of displacement and the loss of a homeland became a central, enduring theme in his subsequent work, fueling his exploration of memory, nostalgia, and the irretrievable past.
The first phase of his literary life began in Europe, primarily in Berlin, where he established himself as a leading voice among the Russian émigré community under the pseudonym "Vladimir Sirin". During this prolific period, he penned nine novels in his native tongue, showcasing a precocious talent for intricate plotting and character study. Works like The Defense explored obsession through the extended metaphor of chess, while Invitation to a Beheading served as a potent, surreal critique of totalitarian absurdity. In 1925, he married Véra Slonim, an intellectual force in her own right, who would become his indispensable partner, editor, translator, and lifelong anchor.
The escalating shadow of Nazism necessitated another, urgent relocation in 1940, this time to the United States. It was here that Nabokov undertook an extraordinary linguistic metamorphosis, making the challenging yet resolute shift from Russian to English as his primary language of expression. He became a U.S. citizen in 1945, solidifying his new life in North America. To support his family, he took on academic positions, first founding the Russian department at Wellesley College, and later serving as a highly regarded professor of Russian and European literature at Cornell University from 1948 to 1959.
During this academic tenure, he also dedicated significant time to his other great passion: lepidoptery. He worked as an unpaid curator of butterflies at Harvard University's Museum of Comparative Zoology. His scientific work was far from amateurish; he developed novel taxonomic methods and a groundbreaking, highly debated theory on the migration patterns and phylogeny of the Polyommatus blue butterflies, a hypothesis that modern DNA analysis confirmed decades later.
Nabokov achieved widespread international fame and financial independence with the publication of Lolita in 1955, a novel that was initially met with controversy and censorship battles due to its provocative subject matter concerning a middle-aged literature professor and his obsession with a twelve-year-old girl. The novel's critical and commercial success finally allowed him to leave teaching and academia behind. In 1959, he and Véra moved permanently to the quiet luxury of the Montreux Palace Hotel in Switzerland, where he focused solely on writing, translating his earlier Russian works into meticulous English, and studying local butterflies.
His later English novels, such as Pale Fire (1962), a complex, postmodern narrative structured around a 999-line poem and its delusional commentator, cemented his reputation as a master stylist and a technical genius. His literary style is characterized by intricate wordplay, a profound use of allusion, structural complexity, and an insistence on the artist's total, almost tyrannical, control over their created world. Nabokov often expressed disdain for what he termed "topical trash" and the simplistic interpretations of Freudian psychoanalysis, preferring instead to focus on the power of individual consciousness, the mechanics of memory, and the intricate, often deceptive, interplay between art and perceived "reality". His unique body of work, straddling multiple cultures and languages, continues to

Reviews

[Jan-Maat]

Really quite fun, but with hindsight more interesting maybe about what it doesn't say, than what it does. This is Gogol imagined as though he was a Nabokov character, so no discussion of Gogol as a fellow craftsman nor does Nabokov allow any light to be cast on his own writing, I don't think he wrote on other Russian authors so one suspects that a connection existed or some bond of the surreal linked them, although Nabokov obviously isn't going to make anything plain - the reader has to solve the chess puzzle for themself. Nor is Nabokov particularly insightful about Gogol, but then almost every opinion or theory about him has been knocked into a cocked hat by The sexual labyrinth of Nikolai Gogol. Nor is there anything much here of standard biography, indeed Nabokov maybe plays a game in pretending that the 'editor' insists on some biography so Nabokov provides a crude info-dump at the end of the book.

He comes into his own in discussing translations of Gogol into English, as you can imagine these are all horribly inadequate in his opinion (poor Constance Garnett commits the unforgivable sin of mistranslating one of the species of tree in Dead Souls this as you can imagine radically transforms one's entire reading of the text and possibly no one other than Nabokov would ever have bothered to mention such a mistake - or have been alert to it, and one imagines that he'd consider any future translation that didn't appear over his name to be a waste of time too, and he has a lengthy discussion of Poshlost' which he considers to be a key attribute of Gogolian aesthetics - you'd best read it yourself to see, my memory is fragile and faded I recall Nabokov mentioning Gogol telling a story of a German man wooing his beloved by engaging in intimate relations with a swan in a lake brave man, shocked swan this convinced the girl to fling her arms about her sweetheart and marry him instantly the swan, I imagine, too disturbed by the experience either to officiate or witness this apparently illustrated the comical, posing craziness of foreigners to Gogol. One might see this of something of a piece with the phallic story of a man's nose detaching itself and rushing around St.Petersburg advancing it's career, while the man with out a nose, even in the long days before Freud, languishes.

[Giovanna · Rating 5 out of 5]

«Vera poesia di quel tipo provoca non risa, non lacrime, ma un sorriso radioso di perfetta soddisfazione, e fusa di beatitudine; e uno scrittore può essere davvero orgoglioso di sé se riesce a far sì che i suoi lettori o, più esattamente, alcuni suoi lettori sorridano e facciano le fusa a quel modo.»

Vale per Gogol', ma vale anche per Nabokov: il suo Nikolaj Gogol' è decisamente un saggio che dà soddisfazione. Intelligente, profondo, non scade mai nella generalizzazione o nella banalità, e, soprattutto, parla di uno scrittore a partire dai suoi testi, analizzandone il linguaggio e lo stile. Infatti, come spiega Nabokov stesso, le trame di Gogol' stanno tutte nello stile e «la sua opera, come ogni grande conquista letteraria, è un fenomeno di linguaggio e non di idee».

È, quindi, costante l'attenzione alla scrittura di Gogol', ricca e corposa, mentre si rifiuta qualsiasi interpretazione di Gogol' come scrittore di denuncia sociale. Se una denuncia c'è, nelle sue opere, è la denuncia della pošlost', di quel senso di pienezza sotto cui si maschera la vacuità, di quella grettezza quotidiana che testimonia il Male nel mondo più della grande malvagità. Nabokov non si limita a parlare della pošlost' nelle opere di Gogol', la denuncia anche nei romanzi e in tanta parte della critica letteraria, scrivendo quasi il proprio manifesto critico.

Vista la ricchezza dell'ordito stilistico gogoljano, Nabokov sul finale insiste sull'importanza di leggere questo autore nella sua lingua d'origine (lamentando anche i difetti delle vecchie traduzioni: ricordiamo che il libro è del 1944). Invita almeno a imparare la corretta pronuncia del nome di Gogol': «Gaw-gol, e non Go-gall. La “l” finale è una “l” morbida e in dissolvenza, che non esiste in inglese. Non si può sperare di comprendere un autore se non si è nemmeno capaci di pronunciare il suo nome». Sottoscrivo. Per la pronuncia ho la coscienza a posto; per la lettura in lingua originale un po' meno, ma questo saggio potrebbe avermi dato la spinta per tentare l'impresa. L'ideale sarebbe leggere Gogol' in russo e poi di nuovo questo saggio nell'inglese di Nabokov. Sarebbe un'esplosione letteraria e linguistica, un arricchimento profondissimo. Un pensierino ce lo faccio.

[Jonfaith · Rating 4 out of 5]

. . . By poetry I mean the mysteries of the irrational as perceived through rational words. True poetry of that kind provokes—not laughter and not tears—but a radiant smile of perfect satisfaction, a purr of beatitude—and a writer may well be proud of himself if he can make his readers, or more exactly some of his readers, smile and purr that way.

As noted earlier, I was struck by the maestro’s snobbery. Undoubtedly Nabokov influenced my views on Gogol specifically and the novel generally. The older Jon was less impressed with the arrogance. Nabokov’s ideological gaze can’t see any merit in Soviet letters, he doesn’t care much for Dostoevsky either, which is another mistake on his part. The book offers a wickedly close reading of Gogol’s three principal works: Inspector General, The Overcoat and Dead Souls. Much of this affords Nabokov to rail against the poor quality of translations into English. Despite such, Nabokov sees Gogol as unique, contrary to most generalization.

I thought rereading this would push me to return to Dead Souls. It may still but not right now.

[Adam Floridia · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nabokov was a genius. Nabokov was supremely confident in his own genius. However, this is the first time that his arrogance bothered me. In this "biography" (I really hesitate to use that word) of Gogol, Nabokov spends as much time praising his own translations (and deriding others'), inserting obscure (or at least unnecessary) literary references, explicating his understanding of "poshlust," and creating some beautifully worded, but Meaningless!, sentences.

I know little more about Gogol or his works than I did before reading this.

[Steven R. Kraaijeveld · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gogol was a strange creature, but genius is always strange; it is only your healthy second-rater who seems to the grateful reader to be a wise old friend, nicely developing the reader's own notions of life.

This quotation nicely characterizes Nikolai Gogol, which is in roughly equal measures about Gogol, Gogol's artistic genius (separated and separable from his person), and Nabokov himself. It is not a biography; at least not in the traditional sense. That Nabokov doesn't mention Gogol's date of birth until the very last paragraph is symptomatic: details of biography and chronology are deemed irrelevant - what is of sole significance is Gogol's art. And what that art is, turns out to have been largely misconceived. Nabokov focused on three works, which he considers Gogol's greatest (thereby pleasantly ignoring Gogol's early work, like his story collection Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka, for which Nabokov frankly admits his dislike): his short story The Overcoat, his play The Government Inspector, and his unfinished novel Dead Souls. I am not going to discuss what Nabokov considers Gogol's art - his conjuring - because that is the point of Nikolai Gogol. I would recommend having read at least Gogol's three previously mentioned main works before putting yourself in Nabokov's hands, as Nabokov assumes great familiarity with them. Or perhaps he doesn't, after all, since he spells out to you exactly what you have missed in reading Gogol's works the first time around (and which you have been missing since). Wit, erudition, and a healthy dose of aristocratic opinions - it's all there.

[Domenico Fina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Magistrale saggio alla sua maniera. Nabokov quando trova un autore congeniale, Gogol' e Puskin o Anna Karenina come singolo libro, riesce a dare il meglio di sé. In questo saggio illumina le tre opere maggiori di Gogol', Il cappotto, Il revisore e Le anime morte e allo stesso tempo scrive un bellissimo saggio sull'essenziale nella letteratura e sul guardarsi bene dalla retorica pervasiva.

Gogol', nelle sue massime opere, Il cappotto, Le anime morte, Il revisore, non elabora storie avvincenti, a lui interessa un particolare, un'immagine patetica, strana. Uno scompenso. I suoi personaggi sembrano un 'cumulo di riflessi condizionati'. Fanno piuttosto pena e allo stesso tempo pensiamo, beh, quello forse sono stato io, magari solo una volta però, eh. Questo modo di comporre portò la critica ad usare il termine pošlost o come preferisce scrivere Nabokov poshlust; parola che si potrebbe intendere come volgarità, kitsch, grettezza, pusillanimità, piccineria; è una di quelle parole che ogni cultura reclama a sé in modo esclusivo. Nabokov stesso in Lolita vuole esprimere questo stato mentale contemporaneo diffuso, in cui tra vita e pubblicità non esiste più confine netto. Gogol'. Se adesso voi scrivete Gogol' Roma su Google (che peraltro Berlusconi una volta ha pronunciato Gogol) vi compare la casa in cui egli abitò a più riprese, nel suo periodo migliore, dal 1838 al 1842, prima di precipitare in una sorta di lungo delirio durato dieci anni nel quale per cercare ispirazione scriveva lettere scombinate agli amici e al mondo intero, indicando loro i libri da leggere per educarli e far sì che potessero dare spunti a lui stesso per continuare a scrivere; la verità è che Gogol' aveva perso il suo grandioso estro e la sua immaginazione era mutata da antiretorica ad invasata retorica confessionale. Scrittore grandissimo fino a 33 anni e poi prigioniero delle sue paranoie. Quindi Gogol', dicevo, su Google Maps si può vedere la casa dove abitò, in via Sistina 125, ora qui c'è una targa ricordo al primo piano, in strada, al 126, c'è il caffè Gogol, alla destra il Teatro Sistina. Questo è poshlust?
Cos'è il poshlust? Gogol' racconta una storiella: un tale corteggiava una ragazza della quale era innamorato ma lei non se lo filava. Decise di esibirsi in lunghe nuotate nel lago davanti alla finestra della casa di lei, si spogliò, si gettò in acqua nudo e portò con sé due cigni finti che lasciò galleggiare in acqua mentre vi nuotava attorno. Ebbene infine lei si innamorò e lo sposò. Questo sentimentalismo allo sciroppo d'acero è ancora poshlust? "Porta a porta", per tornare all'oggi, è poshlust?
Ma anche a livelli eccelsi il poshlost non scompare, Polonio in Amleto, Homais in Madame Bovary, Marion Bloom nell'Ulisse di Joyce, annota Nabokov, sono poshlust.
E le frasi, le frasi bomboniera su facebook e gli aforismi brillanti e ultimativi su Twitter e i come sto adesso, come mi sento, come mi sentirò. E le foto che rimandano a non si sa più cosa. I simbolismi e le allusioni. E tutto il dibattito sulla violenza partendo da un fatto semplice. Asia Argento confessa una violenza subita, quindi dovrebbe finire qui. Con un po' di desolazione discreta. Invece si eleva una montagna immane in un coro di voci che scompare in una notte, lasciando tutto com'è. Questo non è ancora poshlust?
E non è poshlust quello che sto scrivendo qui, ora? che sa di retorica, non sarebbe il momento di dire che la retorica non è salutare, inserirla nell'elenco delle patologie come il morbillo?
Vaccinarla magari con Gogol'. E non è poshlust la frase pronunciata da Dostevskij che ricorre da decenni e accompagna ancora il nome Gogol' e che si trova su Wikipedia: "Siamo tutti usciti dal cappotto di Gogol"?
Infine, non è poshlust la storiella che si racconta sulla morte di Gogol' stesso, curato con sanguisughe fin sopra il naso - l'organo del corpo umano nel quale si sarebbe voluto trasformare, un enorme naso 'con le narici delle dimensioni di due grandi secchi, così da poter inalare quanti più aromi possibile, quanta più primavera' - allorché Gogol' si stacca tutte le sanguisughe addosso e grida ai dottori: "Presto, una scala!"

[Jim Coughenour · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nabokov's strong opinions about Gogol were welcome company when reading Dead Souls, pointing out swift bits of artistry that I missed on my own. One can't help but see how much his own fiction (and criticism) were influenced by the wizardry of Gogol, even when he's describing Gogol himself:

His boyhood? Uninteresting. He passed through the usual illnesses: mumps, scarlet fever and pueritus scribendi. He was a weakling, a trembling mouse of a boy, with dirty hands and greasy locks, and pus trickling out of his ear. He gorged himself with sticky sweets. His schoolmates avoided touching the books he had been using.

I love that pueritus scribendi. This is scholarship worthy of Kinbote.

[Eric Hendrixson · Rating 4 out of 5]

As an introduction to Gogol, this book would be next to useless. Nabokov wrote this book with the assumption that the reader has already read at least Gogol's major works. (And what Nabokov dismisses as Gogol's minor works and not worth discussing are considered by some to be his most important writings.) This book is also not very useful to someone who has read a good deal of Gogol and no Nabokov. However, to someone who has read both authors, this is a fascinating text, maybe a necessary text.

Someone unfamiliar with the stories will find it bewildering that Nabokov refers to fictional characters in the midst of the biography and sometimes find it dull that Nabokov spends chapters explicating sections of the stories sentence by sentence. However, Nabokov is arguing against a number of traditions that have appropriated Gogol's work, especially Soviet Realism and poor Victorian English translations. He is working against the tradition of viewing Russian authors as grim and moralistic. It is also helpful for a fan of what Vasily Aksyonov called Gogol's lyric digressions to see a first-rate author who was also a native speaker explain the linguistic reasoning behind these digressions.

I sometimes questioned the judgments Nabokov made on Gogol's personality, not because I had any evidence to the contrary but because I know how good Nabokov is at constructing personalities and making them seem real. That said, I still believe Nabokov's characterizations the same way I believe Burgess' characterizations of Shakespeare's personality. They are reasonable and useful descriptions, though sometimes tinted with shades of the biographers' own personalities. They are true in the way a mythology or Newtonian physics is true. They are poignant and useful if not entirely true.

What this book is lacking would be impossible to provide: a detailed biography and literary criticism of Nabokov written by Gogol. That is a book I would want to read.

[Ivan Dimitrov · Rating 4 out of 5]

Страхотна книга на Набоков за Гогол. Като изключим, че по традиция когато Набоков говори за други автори, той е страшно надут и понякога ти се иска да му удариш един чимбер...
Книгата е написана нетрадиционно и е нещо между биография и критически преглед върху живота и творчеството на Гогол. Започва със смъртта му и завършва с раждането му. Набоков разглежда най-вече зрелите му произведения.

Обърнато е сериозно внимание и на дразнещите митове, които са свързани с името на Гогол. Като това, че той е реалист и познава добре животът в Русия. Както Набоков отбелязва - Гогол всичко на всичко има около 20-на часа прекарани в руската провинция (в зряла възраст), без да броим времето, в което се е возил в каляска.

[Carloesse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Con la sua prosa perfetta, direi quasi sontuosa, Nabokov rilegge Gogol e lo libera dai tanti luoghi comuni in cui la critica (e da lì l'opinione generale) lo ha spesso ingabbiato per motivi ideologici (politici, morali o religiosi che fossero), per rendercelo così come fu: un grandissimo (uno dei massimi in assoluto) scrittore finchè l’esigenza di essere se stesso e di dare libero sfogo alla fantasia che madre natura gli aveva copiosamente donato riuscì ad avere il sopravvento sull’immagine che in fondo voleva a tutti i costi dare di se stesso, o sulla volontà di comunicare significati che mai prima lo avevano condizionato nella sua opera, e che alla fine lo misero definitivamente in crisi, portandolo ad una prematura scomparsa.

[Magdalith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nabokov napisał biografię Gogola. "Biografię", bo z klasycznie rozumianą biografią niewiele ma to wspólnego. Książka ta jest ponoć uważana za jeden z pięciu-sześciu istniejących na świecie przykładów "narracyjnej krytyki literackiej". Zaczyna się od śmierci Gogola, a kończy jego narodzinami. Czyta się ją ze wzruszeniem i zachwytem. Żałuje się, że jest taka króciutka. Żałuje się, że nie ma w niej jeszcze więcej samego Nabokova, a mniej Gogola (przyznaję, że sam Gogol interesuje mnie w niewielkim stopniu).

Nabokov wykreował tu Gogola, Gogol jest postacią niemal literacką, choć nie możemy nazwać go postacią zmyśloną. Nie wiem, na ile Nabokov sam dopowiedział sobie wszystko to, co nie było oczywiste w życiorysie Gogola, ale bardzo bawi mnie fakt, że zdaje się rozumieć jego dzieła lepiej od samego autora. Nabokov ma tupet, to prawda.
Co najważniejsze w tej książce: Nabokov obalił mit (dziś właściwie nie jest już to ponoć mitem, ale oczywistym faktem znanym całej krytyce literackiej), że Gogol był realistą, społecznikiem i opisywał polityczne realia Rosji. Nie był. Gogol stwarzał wielowymiarowe, nieoczywiste światy, a jego proza jest metafizyczna, a nie społecznie zaangażowana. Wierzę Nabokovowi.

"Gogol był dziwnym stworzeniem, ale geniusz zawsze jest dziwny; to tylko wasz zdrowy podrzędny pisarzyna wydaje się wdzięcznemu czytelnikowi starym mądrym przyjacielem, miło rozwijającym jego własne wyobrażenia o życiu. Wielka literatura dotyka krawędzi tego, co irracjonalne. "Hamlet" jest dzikim snem neurotycznego naukowca. "Szynel" Gogola jest groteskowym i ponurym koszmarem, robiącym czarne dziury w niejasnym deseniu życia."

"Przed pojawieniem się Gogola i Puszkina literatura rosyjska była ślepawa. Tym, co widziała, był zarys podpowiadany przez rozum: nie widziała koloru jako takiego, wykorzystywała tylko wyświechtane kombinacje ślepego rzeczownika i po psiemu wiernego mu przymiotnika, które Europa odziedziczyła po starożytnych. Jak niebo, to niebieskie, jutrzenka czerwona, listowie zielone, oczy ślicznotki czarne, chmury szare i tak dalej. To Gogol (a po nim Lermontow i Tołstoj) pierwszy zobaczył żółć i fiolet. To że niebo może być o wschodzie słońca bladozielone, a śnieg w bezchmurny dzień soczysto niebieski, w uszach tak zwanego "klasycznego" pisarza, przyzwyczajonego do sztywnych schematów, brzmiało jak heretycki nonsens."

"Gogol zawsze znakomicie potrafił stwarzać swego czytelnika, co jest przywilejem wielkich pisarzy."

[Dimebag · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘The variety, force and richness of Nabokov’s perceptions have not even the palest rival in modern fiction … the nearest thing to pure sensual pleasure that prose can offer’ Martin Amis

‘He did us all an honour by electing to use, and transform, our language’ Anthony Burgess

‘The power of the imagination is not apt soon to find another champion of such vigour’ John Updike

‘He has moulded and manipulated the language with greater dexterity, wit and invention than any author since Shakespeare’ Daily Mail

‘A real magician’ Paul Bailey

‘The butterflies of his mind made earthworks of his contemporaries’ Sunday Times

‘One of the most original and creative novelists of our time’ Financial Times

‘He has mastered all the technical tricks of the novel, and he has invented a few of his own’ Peter Ackroyd

‘Besides his gift of translating a subject into sharp-cut visual images, Nabokov has also an extravagant sense of humour, a grasp of the absurd behind the tragic’ Observer

[Justine Kaufmann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nabokov’s study on Gogol is a book to experience if you are a fan of Gogol and an even greater fan of Nabokov. Yes, the reader might learn some interesting facts about Gogol’s life (“His boyhood? Uninteresting.”) and a selection of his works (“the plot of The Government Inspector is as unimportant as the plots of all Gogol’s books), but really, what you’re signing up for is to spend 150 pages in the mind of Nabokov, out from behind the curtain of fiction and on stage as a reader, scholar, and self-appointed critic of society (one of the only men who can throw shade at anything and everything under the sun and still become more endearing in my eyes?). Anyways, I’ll hand over the rest of this space to the man himself:

On Gogol and Noses:
-“The point to be noted is that from the very start the nose as such was a funny thing to [Gogol’s] mind (as to that of all Russians) something sticking out, something not quite belonging to its bearer, and at the same time (that much belonging to its bearer, and at the same time (that much I may as well concede to the Freudians) something peculiarly and grotesquely masculine.”

Gogolian Rhapsody:
-“Perhaps, the most interesting point in this letter is the notion to which Gogol was to cling so desperately at every critical stage of his literary life that he needed the surroundings of a foreign country—any foreign country—in order to achieve “in the silence of solitude” something. That might bring benefit to those “brethren” of his whom he avoided in reality”

-“No wonder St. Petersburg revealed its oddity when the oddest Russian in Russia walked its streets. For St. Petersburg was just that: a reflection in a blurred mirror, an eerie medley of objects put to the wrong use, things going backwards the faster they moved forward, pale gray nights instead of ordinary black ones, and black days—the “black day” of a down-to-heel clerk. The door of a private house might open and a pig might come out—just like that.”

“It would be wrong to assert that Gogol placed his characters in absurd situations. You cannot place a man in an absurd situation if the whole world he lives in is absurd.”



Readers, Censors and Translators, oh my!:
-“Earnest readers were yearning for “facts” and “true romance” and “human interest” just as they do now, poor souls.”

-“The censor’s committee was as blatantly a collection of cringing noodles or pompous asses as all such organizations are.”


-“The old translations of Dead Souls into English are absolutely worthless and should be expelled from all public and university libraries.”

[Cosimo · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Così invece di spegnersi lentamente in una cappella di legno tra ascetici abeti sulla riva di un lago leggendario, Cicikov fu riportato al suo elemento nativo: le fiammelle azzurre di un umile inferno".

Linguisticamente ricchissimo, con un'ibridazione elaborata in modo sofisticato e efficace, questo testo apre importanti prospettive sull'arte di Gogol e sulla poetica di Nabokov, offrendo riflessioni sulla letteratura che vanno oltre la maschera delle funzioni e degli obiettivi delle opere d'arte, per scandagliare improvvisamente la sua essenza altra, il suo atemporale altrove, per indagare la naturale doppiezza della narrazione estetica e la specularità delle caratteristiche del racconto. Nell'affermare che la grande letteratura corre sempre lungo il filo dell'irrazionale, Nabokov compone un testo polivalente e diretto, senza vie di fuga, senza tentennamenti, imperscrutabile come un abisso, profondo quanto un deserto notturno.

"A una tale suprema altezza dell'arte la letteratura non ha, ovviamente, niente a che vedere con la pietà per i derelitti o con la condanna dei potenti. Fa appello a quella profondità segreta dell'animo umano in cui le ombre di altri mondi passano come ombre di navi mute e senza nome".

[Elena · Rating 3 out of 5]

En esta especie de biografia, Nabokov se pasa más tiempo regocijándose de sus traducciones y burlándose de las del resto, insertando demasiadas y largas citas o analizando el concepto "poshlust" que hablando de Gógol. De esta lectura sales sabiendo más del autor de "El abrigo". "¿Su infancia? Poco interesante". Aunque como introducción a Gógol no sirve. Por suerte, al menos acabo de leer "Almas muertas". Creo que el lector que haya leído a ambos antes lo disfrutará más. En la parte final, Nabokov, mientras analiza la escritura de su compatriota, nos habla de su forma de entender la literatura. Y es ahí donde más lo he disfrutado. Pronto leo "Lolita" para desquitarme. Ya sabía que empezar por aquí con Nabokov no iba a ser lo mejor.

[Irena · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nabokov likes to be clever. Not a teacher, not smartassy, but just you're mistaken and I know the right answer.
He mostly says what Gogols works aren't and keeps stressing that the "creative reader" will know.
You needn't read any Gogol cause N. man quotes almost all of him, adding how this or that translation is awful and how poetic Gogol's some work is.
I came out of this experience smarter than I was before, alright. I'm just sad that such a great writer wrote about an even greater writer like he's some half wit and N. is his mom who knows whats best for her son.
Spend your time better reading Bulgakov.

[Piero Marmanillo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un genio sobre otro genio. Así se puede denominar este libro en una frase. Publicado en español por la Editorial Anagrama a principios de este año 2022, traducido por Anna Renau, espero que no pasen tantos años para que otro libro tan importante pueda ser traducido al español (la obra en idioma original -inglés- es de 1944).


Vladimir Nabókov en este libro lo que hace es mostrarnos los mecanismos ocultos del proceso artístico de Nikolái Gógol. No nos cuenta lo obvio, la lectura superficial de sus obras, ni las interpretaciones canonizadas de las mismas. Nabokov revela un profundo conocimiento del arte de su compatriota y de su biografía. 

Las obras analizadas son El inspector, Almas muertas y El capote; al final el libro contiene la cronología del autor (elaborada por Nabokov a insistencia de su editor) y finalmente notas explicativas y complementarias a sus análisis.

Nikolái Gógol (nacido en 1809), un hombre de una brillante fantasía que le sirvió para crear obras inmortales como las arriba citadas pero que lamentablemente ese fuego imaginativo fue apagándose con el paso del tiempo por el mismo laberinto de sus ideas y creencias, y por más esfuerzo que hizo por alimentarse de fuentes externas (incluso viajó a Palestina) no pudo volver a ser el mismo de antes. No halló la manera de hacer la segunda parte de Almas muertas, segunda parte que daría un giro moralizante en oposición a las aventuras demoníacas del Sr. Chíchikov en la primera parte. Finalmente quemó sus manuscritos y murió al poco tiempo (1852).

Las brillantes traducciones que hace Nabokov de algunos pasajes de las obras de Nikolai Gógol revelan, en la medida de sus posibilidades, la magia de la obra creativa de Gógol, sus impresionantes recursos, por ejemplo, para introducir personajes secundarios a partir de una secuencia insólita (por ejemplo al comparar un carruaje con la forma de una sandía, esa palabra servirá de gatillo para seguir otras comparaciones o derivaciones hasta la aparición de un personaje secundario (un músico) que tan pronto aparece como se va).

Ahora vayamos a leer nuevamente a Gógol pero con las gafas construidas por Nabokov.

Para concluir cierro con un pasaje del libro:

« Como uno o dos lectores pacientes puede que hayan deducido a estas alturas, este es en realidad el único llamamiento que me interesa, Mi propósito al poner por escrito estas notas sobre Gógol ha quedado, espero, perfectamente claro. Hablando en plata, viene a ser lo siguiente: si esperas averiguar algo acerca de Rusia, si estás ansioso por saber por qué los curtidos alemanes erraron en su bombardeo aéreo, si lo que te interesa son "ideas", "hechos" y "mensajes", aléjate de Gógol. La horrible molestia de aprender ruso con el fin de leerle no te será reembolsada en el tipo de moneda que tú utilizas. Aléjate, aléjate. No tiene nada que contarte. Mantente alejado de la vía. Alta tensión. Cerrado per sécula seculorum. Evítalo; abstente; no. Me gustaría tener aquí una lista completa de todos los interdictos, vetos y amenazas posibles..., apenas necesaria, por supuesto, dado que la clase de lector equivocada, ciertamente no llegará nunca tan lejos. Pero sí recibo con los brazos abiertos a la clase buena de los mismos: mis hermanos, mis dobles. Mi hermano està tocando el órgano. Mi hermana está leyendo. Esta es mi tía. Primero aprenderás el alfabeto, las labiales, las linguales, las dentales, las letras que zumban, el zángano y el abejorro, y la mosca tsé-tsé. Una de las vocales te hará decir "¡Puaj!". Te sentirás mentalmente agarrotado y magullado tras tu primera declinación de los pronombres personales. Sin embargo, no veo ningún otro modo de llegar a Gógol (ni a ningún otro escritor ruso, en realidad). Su obra como todos los grandes logros literarios, constituye un fenómeno de lenguaje, y no un fenómeno de ideas. »

Un libro recomendable.

[landon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I swore to take a break from Nabokov after handing in my thesis, then promptly broke my oath when I remembered this slim volume on my desk. Its greyscale picture of Nikolai Gogol stares at you with one eye while the other cubistically folds over the book’s spine. His face is soft and serene, his lips smiling faintly under a modest moustache, his pale nose hanging over it, mostly unremarkable. Like most of Nabokov’s prose, this book’s paragraphs feel neat, light, and well coordinated. They make up five chapters of criticism, plus commentaries and a chronology (which apparently his publisher pressed him to add). It is Nabokov’s only book-length monograph on a literary figure – his Pushkin scholarship began with the 1937 essay “Pouchkine, ou le vrai et le vraisemblable” (“Pushkin, or the True and the Seemingly True”) and in the dense commentary on his 1964 Eugene Onegin translation. His exegeses on canonical Russian and European authors appeared in the published collections of his Cornell lectures. Gogol seems to hold a special place in Nabokov’s personal pantheon and in his fiction, though like most aspects of Gogol’s life and work, this place can be difficult to define rationally.

The monograph begins with Gogol’s death and ends with his birth, but no linear chronology connects those two points. Nabokov’s unique goals are clear from the start. First of all, he wants to delineate the singular queerness of Gogol’s character by analyzing his biography (using mainly Vikenty Veresaev’s 1933 Гоголь в Жизни [Gogol in Life]) and fictional style (using the Russian originals of Gogol’s works and Nabokov’s own translations of them). His second aim is polemical: to cut through the bad translations and interpretations that Gogol’s work has accrued throughout its century of popularity. Along the way, there emerges a portrait of Gogol as Russia’s greatest fictionist whose genius was cut short by illness, madness, and religiosity.

Rather than joining in any contemporary wave of critical methodology, Nabokov achieves this portrait through a unique, slightly antiquated approach. Fittingly for his status of permanent exile, his primary preoccupation seems to be a kind of literary historical mythology, a sincere evaluation of the legends of a culture dissolved by revolution. For Nabokov, the anecdotes that arise around a figure in its native culture help one to assess the bearing the writer’s work had on “reality.” He is interested in how fiction shapes history more than how history shapes fiction. Thus the wealth of anecdotes about Pushkin’s guidance of Gogol prove rich fodder for Nabokov. He develops a subtle history of taste among the imperial Russian intelligentsia, revealing the contours of his bygone community’s erudite imagination.

In his closing paragraphs, Nabokov smirks at those who will try to define Gogol’s influence on his fiction using the monograph. However, a few techniques which he points out in his close readings of Gogol’s fiction can be located easily enough in Nabokov’s own work. Apart from a general respect for the uncanny, he uses Gogol’s vivid incidental characters – a passerby born from the scenery or a metaphor – to suggest reality’s boundlessness in fiction. He also, like Gogol, appreciates the art of ambiguous naming, giving characters evocative and even suspicious-looking labels to keep the reader guessing at their provenance. The two writers’ greatest similarity, though, is their preoccupation with masks. Both men’s fiction thrives off of the infidelity of surfaces, intimating depth by manipulating superficiality. In short: “All reality is a mask” (148). The extensive quoting and summarizing can get dull, but it is ultimately a pleasure to see someone characterize their idol with such care.

[Marlliny Leal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Si aparto la pedantería (innecesaria a mi entender) de Vladimir Nabokov, este libro me resultó de mucho provecho para aprender a identificar detalles de interés en las obras de Gógol (especialmente en tres de las más conocidas: El inspector, El capote y Almas muertas). Me sirvió para confirmar mi impresión luego de leer El capote: no es en las tramas de Gógol donde reside su genialidad (sus tramas son sencillas!) sino en la manera de narrar, que es sencillamente deslumbrante. Con Gógol no hay spoiler posible: no pasa nada si te cuentan de qué va uno de sus libros, lo verdaderamente interesante es lo bien que lo pasas dejándote llevar por las locuras (geniales) de Gógol.

Lamento no saber nada de ruso, porque es evidente que en las traducciones se pierde mucho de las sutilezas del lenguaje de Gógol pero Nabokov se anima a contarnos más detalle sobre las palabras, frases y hasta sonidos que se captan en la versión original pero que desaparecen lamentablemente en las traducciones (y bueno hay que aguantar como Nabokov despotrica de los traductores, pero ni modo! De hecho en algún punto menciona que no tiene sentido leer a Gógol en otro idioma que no sea el ruso)

Si eres de las personas que busca información sobre el autor antes de leerle un libro, pues creo que este libro de Nabokov te viene como anillo al dedo.

Y ahora voy sin lugar a dudas voy con Almas muertas!! Y para espanto de Nabokov, lo haré en Español :(

[JJS. · Rating 3 out of 5]

One thing to know about this book: do not read it before you have read Gogol's key works, or it will not make sense to you and will just be boring (large parts of it are anyway, though).

Nabokov;s study of Gogol has many insights that are interesting, though as an academic study, it is overtly wordy and verbose, many sections are uniteresting, but key sections are interesting enough, with hints of Nabokov's wit. Some of his major points are good, such as that Gogol should be understood as an artist above all other things, since the social and political commentary apparent in his work is purely hijacked by critics and other authors who came after.

If you do read this, just be sure to have read "Dead Souls," "The Overcoat," "The Inspector General" and perhaps some others of Gogol's works, and have your own impressions of Gogol's work made first, before looking at Nabokov's.

[Merilee · Rating 5 out of 5]

The inimitable Nabokov waxes lyrical and satirical about the inimitable Gogol. I read this previously about 40 (!) years ago, and enjoyed it just as much this time through. A short and delicious read.

[Matt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Balls-out, imaginative and totally biased litcrit from the master. I love this kind of thing and I wish more people shed the disinterested facade and brought us as far into the mind and heart of the artist's work as they dare to go.

[Jooseppi Räikkönen · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Karkeasti sanoen on kysymys seuraavasta: jos odotatte saavanne tietää jotain Venäjästä, jos teitä kiinnostaa, miksi rakkojalkaiset saksalaiset eivät onnistuneet salamasodassaan, jos teitä askarruttavat "aatteet" ja "tosiseikat" ja "sanottavat", pysykää kaukana Gogolista."

[Edmond Dantes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Chicca imperdibile sia per amanti di Nabokov che per amanti di Gogol, utile soprattutto a non farsi abbinfolare dai "facili" esperti di Gogol (casualmente ne ho sentito uno questa mattina...)

[Frannie · Rating 4 out of 5]

La grande letteratura corre lungo il filo dell’irrazionale.

A Nabokov è stato chiesto di scrivere un saggio divulgativo su Nikolaj Gogol.
Lo scrittore accetta la missione e non si sogna nemmeno per un attimo di condurla seguendo le regole: parte dalla morte per finire con la nascita, ignora le trame perché le sue storie fanno solo il verso alle storie con le trame, predilige gli aspetti più bizzarri, le scelte linguistiche azzardate, gli aneddoti di vita più insoliti per restituirci un Gogol che ha una forza creativa sconfinata e devastante.

Nabokov non si limita a un elenco pedissequo ma si sofferma solo su quelle opere, a suo avviso, più incisive e che meglio riflettono la poetica dell’autore.
Passa dal teatro sviscerando Il revisore che io ho letto proprio prima di questo saggio (nella mia edizione tradotto come L’ispettore generale) poi passa al grande capolavoro Le anime morte rimasto purtroppo (o per fortuna direbbe Nabokov) incompiuto e mutilato delle successive parti, per poi sfogliare velocemente i racconti più memorabili de Il naso e Il cappotto.

Quello che certamente emerge in ogni riga è la grandissima stima verso l’autore russo e verso la sua essenza russa, che Nabokov fa passare attraverso il complicato ingranaggio della traduzione, provando a non deturpare l’opera originale travisandone il senso e la lingua.
Inoltre, il fatto che leggiamo questo saggio tradotto in italiano pone un’ulteriore barriera tra noi e il lavoro che tenta di fare Nabokov ed è proprio per questo ne capiamo la portata e il grande sforzo intellettuale.

Un consiglio: se non siete conoscitori medio-alti di Gogol, non leggete questo libro. Esplorate prima il mondo letterario dello scrittore e poi tornate qui.
E ancora, se siete già esperti di Gogol ma vi appassionano i saggi canonici, strutturati e ordinati, di nuovo, non leggete questo libro. Nikolaj Gogol è per lettori dalla mente apertissima, pronti a farsi sorprendere, ad accompagnare lo scrittore nei suoi flussi di coscienza senza ricevere indicazioni ma arrancando e sgomitando per rimettere insieme i tasselli da soli.
Lavoro interessantissimo ma da non dare in pasto a tutti, ecco.

[Elena Sala · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an idiosyncratic, short biography of Nikolai Gogol. Actually, it is a combination of biography and literary criticism.

On the downside, Nabokov focuses only on DEAD SOULS, THE GOVERNMENT INSPECTOR and "The Overcoat". The rest of Gogol's oeuvre is dismissed. He also indulges in very, very long quotes and sometimes reveals too much of the plot.

I must confess that some of his comments were completely beyond me:
"The prose of Pushkin is three-dimensional; that of Gogol is four-dimensional, at least. He may be compared to his contemporary, the mathematician Lobachevsky, who blasted Euclid and discovered a century ago many of the theories which Einstein later developed."

What does he mean by that? There are many parts such as this one which left me mystified.

Nabokov admires Gogol's genius and he thrashes translators and critics with gusto. He explains why Gogol's oeuvre has nothing to do with social critique. And while instructing us on how to read Gogol, he teaches us how to read Nabokov as well. I think this is the strongest point of this book.

Nabokov explains Gogol's life in a very personal way. As a biography, I find it wanting because it is too short and incomplete. However, it suggests a way of reading Gogol (and Nabokov) which is really illuminating.

[Carlos R. V. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lo encontré en la librería El Aleph y me acordé de Gógol, el perro de Paula, con quien acababa de estar hacía un rato. Pensé que estaría bien conocer su vida y obra a través de Nabokov pero se me ha hecho pesado y me he distraído mucho leyéndolo. Ahora al menos si me preguntan puedo decir: «El perrito se llama Gógol, como el escritor ucraniano de ‘Almas muertas’ que quiso ser una nariz gigante para recoger todos los olores de la primavera en Italia». Pero dudo mucho que me pregunten.

[Zachary Waltz · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read much of the content here in a modified form in the chapter on Gogol in Nabokov’s Russian lectures. It has a few points of interest: An elucidating letter and Nabokov’s commentary (14-21), Comments on the “Government Specter” (54-60), and the elucidation of poshlust (63-74)

[Victoria Ray · Rating 5 out of 5]

Already read Gogol? Then read this book.
Never read Gogol? Then FIRST of all - read this book.

[Siri · Rating 5 out of 5]

Underbar läsning. En sann fröjd att få läsa om den otroliga karaktären Gogol från en kompromisslös och rolig röst som står fast vid sina åsikter och inte lindar in det i diplomatiska formuleringar.