Ruin Lust and Totalitarian Remnants

Yelizaveta Goldfarb Moss
{"title":"Ruin Lust and Totalitarian Remnants","authors":"Yelizaveta Goldfarb Moss","doi":"10.3138/YCL.61.35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This article posits Nabokov’s Invitation to a Beheading as an allegorical novel that resists classical markers of allegory. Its narrative action unfolds without a history, setting, or temporality, and it becomes, in its self-containment, a system outside specific reference. Attributing this text to a critique of a particular totalitarian regime is difficult, as there are no Soviet or Nazi markers in place. The text denies orientation with reality outside the novel; it draws into itself, denying history, nationhood, and language; yet the political system in which Cincinnatus is stuck and to whose laws he is subject follows classic game-plays of totalitarianism. Nabokov uses the literary to enhance the absurdity of such political and social games. Nabokov’s counter-allegorical allegory functions according to a logic of ruins, which gives readable form to the text, the suggestion of a real-life politic, but at the same time exposes its instability and turns its reader-voyeur to its inner workings. The power system is an absurdly intricate theater with no playwright, no director, and no sovereign. It is self-perpetuating; it relies on absolute loyalty to what remains of central dynamism, but the edges of the stage illusion lie exposed. The system reveals nothing about its political inception, and this seems to be the point. In the novel’s prison ruins, we only have the remnants of a past political system, continuing to sustain itself from a previous momentum but unable to draw power from a specific historical past and unable to guarantee a sustainable future.","PeriodicalId":342699,"journal":{"name":"The Yearbook of Comparative Literature","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Yearbook of Comparative Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/YCL.61.35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: This article posits Nabokov’s Invitation to a Beheading as an allegorical novel that resists classical markers of allegory. Its narrative action unfolds without a history, setting, or temporality, and it becomes, in its self-containment, a system outside specific reference. Attributing this text to a critique of a particular totalitarian regime is difficult, as there are no Soviet or Nazi markers in place. The text denies orientation with reality outside the novel; it draws into itself, denying history, nationhood, and language; yet the political system in which Cincinnatus is stuck and to whose laws he is subject follows classic game-plays of totalitarianism. Nabokov uses the literary to enhance the absurdity of such political and social games. Nabokov’s counter-allegorical allegory functions according to a logic of ruins, which gives readable form to the text, the suggestion of a real-life politic, but at the same time exposes its instability and turns its reader-voyeur to its inner workings. The power system is an absurdly intricate theater with no playwright, no director, and no sovereign. It is self-perpetuating; it relies on absolute loyalty to what remains of central dynamism, but the edges of the stage illusion lie exposed. The system reveals nothing about its political inception, and this seems to be the point. In the novel’s prison ruins, we only have the remnants of a past political system, continuing to sustain itself from a previous momentum but unable to draw power from a specific historical past and unable to guarantee a sustainable future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
毁灭、欲望和极权主义的残余
摘要:本文认为纳博科夫的《斩首之邀》是一部抵制经典寓言标记的寓言小说。它的叙事行动在没有历史、背景或时间性的情况下展开,在它的自我包容中,它成为一个特定参考之外的系统。将这篇文章归因于对特定极权主义政权的批评是困难的,因为没有苏联或纳粹的标记。文本否认了小说之外的现实取向;它自我封闭,否认历史、民族和语言;然而,辛辛纳图斯所处的政治体系,以及他所服从的法律,都遵循着极权主义的经典游戏。纳博科夫用文学来强化这种政治和社会游戏的荒谬性。纳博科夫的反寓言寓言根据废墟的逻辑发挥作用,这给文本提供了可读的形式,暗示了现实生活中的政治,但同时也暴露了它的不稳定性,并把它的读者偷窥到它的内部运作。权力系统是一个荒谬复杂的剧场,没有剧作家,没有导演,也没有君主。它是自我延续的;它依赖于对残存的核心活力的绝对忠诚,但舞台幻觉的边缘暴露在外。这个系统没有透露出它的政治起源,这似乎就是问题的关键。在小说的监狱废墟中,我们只有过去政治制度的残余,继续从以前的势头中维持自己,但无法从特定的历史过去中汲取力量,也无法保证一个可持续的未来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
“A Stratagem for Self-Oblivion”: Rosselli, Real Talk, and the Abolition of the “I” Foreign Poems Damage and Repair in Environmental Assessment A Seafloor for the Disaster Receding Margins: Black Rice and the Rhythms of Tidal Transfer
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1