Vladimir Nabokov's "The Vane Sisters"

[xaqxit]

What do you think of this short story? In my opinion it's quite amazing, but I'm really looking forward to discussing it. I won't say anything about it quite yet, so as to not spoil anything.

For those who have not read it (especially fans of Nabokov's novels or other short stories), I highly recommend reading it, and advise against reading anything about the story until having completed a first reading (and having spent some time thinking about the story and/or rereading it).

The story is available in the anthology The Stories of Vladimir Nabokov, in which it takes up about thirteen pages of somewhat small print. For those who do not own or otherwise have access to the anthology, I believe it is available at the following URL (though I am not endorsing this page as I am not sure if the "Vane Sisters" is in the public domain).

http://lib.novgorod.net/NABOKOW/vs.txt

The contets of that page have been cached by Google here

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:z4Ddz0tA7zEJ:lib.novgorod.net/NABOKOW/vs.txt+the+vane+sisters&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

in case the first link doesn't work.

In the case that future posts will feature spoilers, I'm going to put some buffer space here to protect those who have not read the short story. If leaving such space is considered spam or bad practice, just let me know and I'll edit it out.





POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN FUTURE POSTS





. . . . .





. . . . .





. . . . .





. . . . .





. . . . .

[chasestalling]

not one of my nabokov's favorite although i can see why this story may fascinate.

in a story like this, i'm content to appreciate a turn phrase here and a turn of phrase there.

[xaqxit]

What exactly do you mean by "turn phrase." I think the fascinating aspect of the story is how it almost pushes the bounds of what we conventionally think of as unreliable narration. I'm sure there are many other instances of an oblivious narrator, but I feel it just works so well in this story.

[chasestalling]

What exactly do you mean by "turn phrase." I think the fascinating aspect of the story is how it almost pushes the bounds of what we conventionally think of as unreliable narration. I'm sure there are many other instances of an oblivious narrator, but I feel it just works so well in this story.

i don't see how a narrator of fiction can be reliable.

[Walter]

Many thanks for the opening warning re spoilers especially for this story. I am definitely a fan of Nabokov and will one day read the story, perhaps soon. Then I'll be back to read the thread.

[xaqxit]

i don't see how a narrator of fiction can be reliable.

In the strictest sense no narrator (whether of fiction or nonfiction) can be reliable. But in general we normally take it for granted that most narrators are describing what is for the most part from their point of view likely true in the reality of the narrative.

[chasestalling]

In the strictest sense no narrator (whether of fiction or nonfiction) can be reliable. But in general we normally take it for granted that most narrators are describing what is for the most part from their point of view likely true in the reality of the narrative.

interesting, but then this makes a case for my argument that the story is one of nabokov's lesser ones.

but putting arguments aside, the story fascinates as it dovetails with nabokov, the man, as opposed to nabokov, the distinguished author.

[xaqxit]

Okay, well let's just consider the final paragraph a "twist ending." Does it really get much better than that as far as these little gimmicks are concerned?

[chasestalling]

Okay, well let's just consider the final paragraph a "twist ending." Does it really get much better than that as far as these little gimmicks are concerned?

joyce may have something to say about it.

but if you ask me i'm with nabokov: akasics isn't nearly as fascinating as the boy who cried wolf.

[xaqxit]

Where did he mention the boy who cried wolf, I'd like to see that.

[Walter]

I'm back now, having read the story. I was fascinated to see how much it fits in with both the man and his work. His allusion to college relationships is a topic not unknown to him at all, and his detailed knowledge of the paranormal exhibited here was re-used again, much more deftly and elegantly, in Pale Fire. But mainly, the trademarks of his style that really stand out here for me are his sense of humor and his amazing capacity for infinitely detailed observation and description of any aspect of life or reality. Almost as if in this story he were rising to a self-imposed challenge to use just his power of observation alone to write a story. I think the story itself is rather slight when compared to the evident style with which it is told, and it therfore might not appeal so much to readers who are not fans of the great author.
Sorry for the interruption in the thread of conversation so far.

[plainjane]

Not my favorite Nabokov short story, but still wonderful. Mostly for the fantastic descriptions of ordinary sights we take for granted and don't usually notice.
I think his tongue was firmly planted in his cheek whilst writing this one.

[Walter]

Re the ending, I'll do a reread, since I seem to have missed something. :(

[chasestalling]

Where did he mention the boy who cried wolf, I'd like to see that.

in an essay entitled on good readers in lectures on literature (fredson bowers, editor, harcourt brace janovich, publisher).

happy hunting.

[chasestalling]

Re the ending, I'll do a reread, since I seem to have missed something. :(

i think you've said all that might be said and as well as that might be said with regards the vane sisters.

[Walter]

i think you've said all that might be said and as well as that might be said with regards the vane sisters.

/chuckling/
Chase that is indeed a craftily constructed sentence. :D

Perhaps I might say in response that a much more knowledgable reader than I am has since pointed out to me that there is indeed something there to be missed, which I missed. :bawling:

[chasestalling]

walter: me, a more knowledgeable reader? i don't know about that but thanx all the same.