“All writers that are worth anything are humorists.”
“I’m not
P.G. Wodehouse. I’m not a funny man, but give me an example of a great writer
who is not a humorist. The best tragedian is Eugene O’Neill. He is probably the
worst writer. Dostoevsky’s slapstick is wonderful, but in his tragedy he is a
journalist.”
He passes no
critical judgment on Wodehouse, with whom he has much in common, including a
wayward disregard for “realism” and a foregrounding of verbal humor. He’s surprisingly
forgiving here of Dostoevsky, referred to by Nabokov in Despair as “Dusky and Dusty.” Humor is often rooted in our attraction
to and terror of incipient anarchy. Think of Laurel and Hardy, whose films are reliably
about disaster and their futile attempts to contain or avoid it.
Nabokov goes
on to say, wisely, “You really can’t define humor,” and adds, “Perhaps humor is
simply seeing things in a singular, unique, extraordinary way. This almost
sounds funny to the average person.” To note the obvious, Nabokov is the author
of the funniest and saddest books in the language: Lolita, Pnin and Pale
Fire. Near the end he states one of my literary articles of faith:
“To be a
real reader, you have to reread a book. The first time, the book is new. It may
be strange. Actually, it is only the second reading that matters.”
[Nabokov’s 1962
interview with Phyllis Meras for the Providence
Sunday Journal is collected in Think,
Write, Speak: Uncollected Essays, Reviews, Interviews and Letters to the Editor
(eds. Brian Boyd and Anastasia Tolstoy, 2019).]
QUOTE common sense and a sense of humour are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humour is just common sense, dancing. Those who lack humour are without judgement and should be trusted with nothing.”
ReplyDelete–Clive James, The crystal bucket
As the song goes:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q5sKJuRDlY