What do you think?
Rate this book
Nabokov's Blues: The Scientific Odyssey of a Literary Genius
?This insidiously charming book teaches readers about the place of lepidoptery in the life sciences and the kinds of questions that natural scientists seek to answer....Like Nabokov himself, this volume exemplifies some of the virtues shared by art
372 pages, Paperback
First published March 19, 2000
11 people are currently reading
135 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
September 7, 2019
Interesting book, but definitely not in the “popular science” category. It was rather dense and wordy, and some of it was a slog. It seemed like the author never felt that the reader was “getting it”, and kept explaining concepts over and over. While it will appeal to butterfly aficionados as well biologists, it is probably not going to interest the general public who enjoy popular science books like Cod (which was fantastic!).
What was good about the book: lots of history, theories about many areas of butterfly study (such as the various theories about how butterfly species spread around the world, from continental drift to “sweepstakes” where a small group accidentally gets transported), lots of anecdotes and accounts of explorers and lepidopterists.
What was less good about the book: frequently too much dull, extraneous detail about things that had nothing to do with butterflies, and the aforementioned habit of the author to belabor his point (We get it! Move on!).
While I enjoyed it, it isn't one that I'll be able to recommend to any of my reading friends because they won't find it entertaining enough to be worth the effort. Well, unless I make a new lepidopterist friend...
What was good about the book: lots of history, theories about many areas of butterfly study (such as the various theories about how butterfly species spread around the world, from continental drift to “sweepstakes” where a small group accidentally gets transported), lots of anecdotes and accounts of explorers and lepidopterists.
What was less good about the book: frequently too much dull, extraneous detail about things that had nothing to do with butterflies, and the aforementioned habit of the author to belabor his point (We get it! Move on!).
While I enjoyed it, it isn't one that I'll be able to recommend to any of my reading friends because they won't find it entertaining enough to be worth the effort. Well, unless I make a new lepidopterist friend...
April 19, 2011
I read this long before Goodreads existed. It's possible i should give this book 5 stars because i remember that i loved it. but i don't want to get my friend El's hopes up too much. ;)
March 10, 2020
Not even remotely what one might call a page-turner, but Johnson and Coates manage to extract a surprising amount of drama from their sedate analysis of Nabokov’s impact on the world of lepidopterology.
Like many scientific books I’ve read, they do tend to get a bit bogged down by issues that seem of little import to a layperson like myself, but their explanations are clear and they left me with what seems like the proper impression one should take from Nabokov’s relationship with the scientific community: hardly groundbreaking, but far from unimportant. And I’m glad they didn’t feel the need to overhype the role of butterflies in his literary pursuits.
Like many scientific books I’ve read, they do tend to get a bit bogged down by issues that seem of little import to a layperson like myself, but their explanations are clear and they left me with what seems like the proper impression one should take from Nabokov’s relationship with the scientific community: hardly groundbreaking, but far from unimportant. And I’m glad they didn’t feel the need to overhype the role of butterflies in his literary pursuits.
June 3, 2012
This book is an impeccable exposition of Nabokov's contribution to the field of Lepidoptery. Nabokov was as much a lepidopterist as a top-rate writer. This kind of double expertise in such disparate fields is rare to find, and therefore makes Nabokov a curious and amazing subject. I am astounded by Nabokov's output and passion for both pursuits, and Coates and Johnson show how Nabokov's knowledge of butterflies complemented his literary works. "Write what you know" is what Nabokov wisely followed, and he knew lepidoptera. Eventually forsaking a formal career in lepidoptery (fortunately or unfortunately?), this book wonderfully captured the heart's struggle that Nabokov often faced in prioritizing his writing over his butterflies.
Ultimately this book is about the important task that Nabokov assumed for a short period at Harvard, and his eventual vindication as an expert of lepidoptery by an international cohort of lepidopterists many years after his death. One comes away with a better understanding of the exacting nature of science, and how well Nabokov assumed role of initial investigator and namer of a group of butterflies falling under the Lycaenids. His handful of publications on this group of butterflies, historically forgotten or shunned by both experts in literature and lepidoptery, laid the foundations for the huge task of classifying the neotropical branch. The task, which was completed more than half a century after Nabokov abandoned lepidoptery for writing, has now immortalized his life and creative works in the numerous scientific names given to these little blues, such as Nabokovia ada and Madeleinea lolita. Nabokov's personal unease about never leaving a lasting impression on lepidoptery would assuredly be laid to rest.
Additionally, Coates and Johnson choose to use Nabokov's Blues as an outlet for commentary on some of today's most pressing issues of biodiversity loss and underfunding of science research. I am of the opinion that they had an obligation to do so, and they do not sideline the subject of Nabokov by doing so. I'm sure Nabokov would also have deplored the destruction of the environment if he were alive today.
Written with a journalistic ease that makes for a fast-paced reading, Nabokov's Blues is an essential read for anyone who wishes to know more about Nabokov's life and works, for an accurate reading of any of his stories must come with an understanding of his butterfly expertise. As someone who is currently making a transition from formal study of literature to biology, this book holds sobering lessons about the realities of studying science, but spiritedly reveals the intense excitement and fulfillment that comes from finding "all the wonder of the world in the spots on a butterfly's wing."
Ultimately this book is about the important task that Nabokov assumed for a short period at Harvard, and his eventual vindication as an expert of lepidoptery by an international cohort of lepidopterists many years after his death. One comes away with a better understanding of the exacting nature of science, and how well Nabokov assumed role of initial investigator and namer of a group of butterflies falling under the Lycaenids. His handful of publications on this group of butterflies, historically forgotten or shunned by both experts in literature and lepidoptery, laid the foundations for the huge task of classifying the neotropical branch. The task, which was completed more than half a century after Nabokov abandoned lepidoptery for writing, has now immortalized his life and creative works in the numerous scientific names given to these little blues, such as Nabokovia ada and Madeleinea lolita. Nabokov's personal unease about never leaving a lasting impression on lepidoptery would assuredly be laid to rest.
Additionally, Coates and Johnson choose to use Nabokov's Blues as an outlet for commentary on some of today's most pressing issues of biodiversity loss and underfunding of science research. I am of the opinion that they had an obligation to do so, and they do not sideline the subject of Nabokov by doing so. I'm sure Nabokov would also have deplored the destruction of the environment if he were alive today.
Written with a journalistic ease that makes for a fast-paced reading, Nabokov's Blues is an essential read for anyone who wishes to know more about Nabokov's life and works, for an accurate reading of any of his stories must come with an understanding of his butterfly expertise. As someone who is currently making a transition from formal study of literature to biology, this book holds sobering lessons about the realities of studying science, but spiritedly reveals the intense excitement and fulfillment that comes from finding "all the wonder of the world in the spots on a butterfly's wing."
November 27, 2011
I picked up 'Nabokov's Blues' as I had a somewhat perfunctory interest in lepidoptery and also because I had read and enjoyed Nabokov's literary works. This book, co-authored by a lepidopeterist Kurt Johnson is an enjoyable trip (for the most part) into the world of natural history. The book begins with Nabokov's important paper on the Latin American Blue butterflies. This is a descriptive, taxonomic work, which was based on Nabokov's examination of museum specimens. He was trained enough to do dissection work under a microscope and this paper became one of the major initial contributions for this group of butterflies.
Then, follows the description of the work of Balint and Johnson- lepidoperists interested in cataloguing and classifying the butterflies of the Andes, among them the group that is referred to as 'Nabokov's Blues'. This is by far the most interesting part of the book and here, Nabokov's Blues research segues into the actual challenging work of a modern lepidoperist. The difficulties of collecting butterflies in the field, the rarefied world of insect collections in the museum and the inevitable scientific spats and rivalries are all described in good detail. Probably my favourite part of the book was when the lepidoperists got together to name the butterflies after Nabokov's fictional characters- Lolita, Pnin, Shade and so on.
However, the book could have easily ended at some point there, but it tried to cram in too many details and had one digression too many for me to enjoy. Towards the end, it touched on the problem of butterfly conservation and tried to show how Nabokov (in his time) did not seem to have a lot of interest in the subject. But the authors were intent on painting Nabokov in a good light- they insisted that although he didn't say it, surely he meant it. I thought that was a totally unnecessary topic to touch upon anyway. Again, on the topic of modern scientific methods, they continued with the hagiography- had Nabokov been trained to do some of this stuff, he would've, he did not have enough data, so surely it's not his fault etc.
Apart from these tiresome and unnecessary paeans to Nabokov and a need for better stylistic and structural integrity, this book did have a wealth of information and ideas about natural history and the human aspect of science. It shed some light on Nabokov as a lepidopterist (though it could have been done in a better fashion) and also made some nice observations on lepidoptery as a way of being a bit wiser about nature, and consequently about life and literature.
Then, follows the description of the work of Balint and Johnson- lepidoperists interested in cataloguing and classifying the butterflies of the Andes, among them the group that is referred to as 'Nabokov's Blues'. This is by far the most interesting part of the book and here, Nabokov's Blues research segues into the actual challenging work of a modern lepidoperist. The difficulties of collecting butterflies in the field, the rarefied world of insect collections in the museum and the inevitable scientific spats and rivalries are all described in good detail. Probably my favourite part of the book was when the lepidoperists got together to name the butterflies after Nabokov's fictional characters- Lolita, Pnin, Shade and so on.
However, the book could have easily ended at some point there, but it tried to cram in too many details and had one digression too many for me to enjoy. Towards the end, it touched on the problem of butterfly conservation and tried to show how Nabokov (in his time) did not seem to have a lot of interest in the subject. But the authors were intent on painting Nabokov in a good light- they insisted that although he didn't say it, surely he meant it. I thought that was a totally unnecessary topic to touch upon anyway. Again, on the topic of modern scientific methods, they continued with the hagiography- had Nabokov been trained to do some of this stuff, he would've, he did not have enough data, so surely it's not his fault etc.
Apart from these tiresome and unnecessary paeans to Nabokov and a need for better stylistic and structural integrity, this book did have a wealth of information and ideas about natural history and the human aspect of science. It shed some light on Nabokov as a lepidopterist (though it could have been done in a better fashion) and also made some nice observations on lepidoptery as a way of being a bit wiser about nature, and consequently about life and literature.
March 19, 2010
In truth, I would give this book 3 1/2 stars if that were possible. I'm torn, really, because on many levels I enjoyed it and I certainly learned a great deal from it, but on other levels I had some fundamental problems getting through it.
An exploration of Vladimir Nabokov's interest and (amateur but generally well-regarded) career in lepidoptory as well as the import of one of his scientific papers in regards to the classification of a diverse group of butterflies in South America, the book's premise piqued my interest immediately. I love literature, I love science, I love science-y books and writing, what could go wrong? And indeed, for the most part I was happily occupied for the better part of nearly two weeks. I learned about butterfly genitalia, taxonomy's role in the scientific community (low, as it turns out), Nabokov's lifelong fascination with lepidoptory, and how that reflected itself in his writing and interviews, not to mention South American biogeography and the larger worldwide biodiversity crisis. We covered a bit of ground, this book and I.
But there were things that made the book difficult for me to read, and that dampened my joy-in-learning a bit. The authors spend a great deal of time defending Nabokov's lepidoptorilogical reputation, almost ad nauseum for a reader who is entirely willing to listen to their arguements but who has little entomological or formal scientific background. If you're already part of the choir, it can be irritating to be sung at for more than three hundred pages. It begins to feel repetitive ("Haven't we already discussed his viewpoints on biological vs. genetic recognition and division of species?" I asked myself, and yes, I believe we had), and for my part it eventually led to some eye rolling and sighing. I suspect that the way the book was written actually reflects its scientific background--proving things that, for the average reader, have already been adequately proven--and as such I understand where they're coming from, but in this particular context I would have been happier without it.
An exploration of Vladimir Nabokov's interest and (amateur but generally well-regarded) career in lepidoptory as well as the import of one of his scientific papers in regards to the classification of a diverse group of butterflies in South America, the book's premise piqued my interest immediately. I love literature, I love science, I love science-y books and writing, what could go wrong? And indeed, for the most part I was happily occupied for the better part of nearly two weeks. I learned about butterfly genitalia, taxonomy's role in the scientific community (low, as it turns out), Nabokov's lifelong fascination with lepidoptory, and how that reflected itself in his writing and interviews, not to mention South American biogeography and the larger worldwide biodiversity crisis. We covered a bit of ground, this book and I.
But there were things that made the book difficult for me to read, and that dampened my joy-in-learning a bit. The authors spend a great deal of time defending Nabokov's lepidoptorilogical reputation, almost ad nauseum for a reader who is entirely willing to listen to their arguements but who has little entomological or formal scientific background. If you're already part of the choir, it can be irritating to be sung at for more than three hundred pages. It begins to feel repetitive ("Haven't we already discussed his viewpoints on biological vs. genetic recognition and division of species?" I asked myself, and yes, I believe we had), and for my part it eventually led to some eye rolling and sighing. I suspect that the way the book was written actually reflects its scientific background--proving things that, for the average reader, have already been adequately proven--and as such I understand where they're coming from, but in this particular context I would have been happier without it.
December 4, 2017
Nabokov offers us a wonderful view from that "high ridge where the mountainside of 'scientific' knowledge joins the opposite slope of 'artistic' imagination." One of my particular Nabokov favourites is his autobiographical 'Speak, Memory', in which there is a passage (of typically beautiful prose) which reveals he did not fully understand evolution (he finds the complexities of 'mimicry' in butterfly wing patterns etc too intricate and artistic to be the work of natural selection), and I have wondered about his scientific views ever since. While not ahead of his time in terms of his understanding of evolution, 'Nabokov's Blues' describes the specifics of his substantial achievements in taxonomy. When it comes to the Lycaenids he was not only a considerable expert, but also prescient in many of his taxonomic (re)classifications.
December 6, 2007
Nabokov's Blues is a story of the great writers love of lepidoptery. Nabokov was not just a master of literature, but of butterflies. The results of Nabokov's butterfly studies, that remained forgotten for many years while he worked as a curator at Harvards Museum of Comparative Zoology, helped present day scientists gain new taxonomic understanding of the butterfly family called Blues. The authors trace Nabokov's life and relate how his fascination with butterflies shaped his literary work and the scientific work of others. If you like butterflies and are interested on how museums and scientists form taxonomic conclusions you will really enjoy this book.
April 9, 2015
This book calms me down, settles me into myself - absorption of this kind - the details of butterflies and a writer's vocation - this kind of attention to detail that is also found in poetry - maybe this is a way of living poetry - transforming jangled awarenesses and hurts into a single profound sightline - very beautiful and cheaper than flying to island hillsides where the butterflies gave their name to the soul.
July 13, 2016
This exploration of VN's work in lepidoptery--long nearly forgotten, now fully credited--can be challenging for non-scientists (like me). But the sections on Nabokov's travels, and the often hair-raising adventures of the butterfly scientists who followed up and investigated his work, especially as it related to South American butterflies--make it worthwhile. Believe it or not, quite exciting in places. Who knew butterfly hunting could be so dangerous?
August 9, 2016
An enjoyable book. It takes a look at another side of Nabokov -- the scientist. He had a passion for butterflies and was employed as a lepidopterist. He contributed a lot to the study of the "Blues", a family of butterflies that are frequently blue in color. His work was largely ignored for 50 years. This book documents both the early history of his work and how it came to be recognized for its important many years later.
June 21, 2007
I really loved this book! It's one of my all time favorites. I'd recommend it to anyone who considers themselves a scientist or anyone who appreciates the intricaties of the natural world. Nabokov's writing is literary poetry; trully taking you into the world of lepidoptery while exploring some of the remotest parts of Latin America.
September 30, 2011
Really enjoyed reading about Nabokov's interest in butterflies.
November 6, 2010
A neat book about Nabokov's career as a very accomplished lepidopterist. I have to admit, I mostly read it for street cred (cul-de-sac cred?).
June 29, 2012
Quite a bit beyond my ken, but I enjoyed that which I understood.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews