Professor Diment's book moves from biography to literary intrigue quickly and delightfully. The intrigue itself, of course, has been out in the open for quite a while---that Pnin, the stodgy and stumbling professor, was inspired by one of Vladimir Nabokov's colleagues at Cornell, Marc Szeftel.

There's plenty of material on that in the book, but the real treat are the stories on university politics, the strange and shimmering links between art and the "real", the compassionate sketches of very odd characters (including Szeftel himself, as well as Nabokov's first biographer, a Kinbote-like figure), and some seriously funny endnotes. _Pnin_ ends triumphantly, and so does Diment's _Pniniad_, with the reader discovering the life-story of a man who would otherwise be an interesting side-note---what the reader gets is a sort of roman a clef written on the margins of fiction.

I read this book when I had my military training. I must admit that it really gave me much fun and I found fantastic items in those not so famous Nabokov novels such as Mary that I had not seen before. But to most expertised Nabokovians it provides less information than it should have.

These days, biographies seem to be reaching new extremes at both ends of the "length spectrum." At the long end we have all those exhaustive multi-volume essays on political figures and the literary life; at the short end has stood the compact line of Penguin Brief Lives books that cover everyone from Saint Augustine to Elvis Presley.

Now comes Overlook Press with the second entry in its Overlook Brief Lives series --- thin volumes loaded with pictures and text not much longer than an ambitious New Yorker profile. The first of these dealt with Samuel Beckett. Now comes a similar effort, devoted to Vladimir Nabokov and written by Jane Grayson, a British academic and Nabokov specialist.

Nabokov, who died in 1977 at the age of 78, makes a fascinating subject. Most general readers remember him best as the author of LOLITA, that literary sensation of the late 1950s whose title has become a lower-case noun in our dictionaries. But Nabokov also wrote several other estimable novels too, in addition to many short stories, poems, essays, translations and literary criticism (much of it in The New Yorker). He was also an expert on butterflies, a master chess player, the constructor of the first Russian crossword puzzle and the translator of ALICE IN WONDERLAND into Russian.

He inherited a fortune and a vast estate at the age of 17, but was forced to leave Russia because of his father's political activities at the time of the 1917 revolution. He matriculated at Trinity College, Cambridge (England) and lived and wrote in Germany until the advent of Hitler. This forced him to seek a livelihood in the U.S., where he practically had to start his life over again --- both personally and professionally.

LOLITA was published in Paris in 1955 but was greeted "in silence," until Graham Greene singled it out for high praise in a London newspaper. Publication in America three years later gained Nabokov instant notoriety on this side of the Atlantic. His tale of sexual predator ...was condemned as highfalutin pornography. I was so they did not print it.

Nabokov returned to Europe in 1958 and lived out his life in Switzerland. The biggest event during this time was a sulfurous literary feud with Edmund Wilson, who had been a close friend during his years in America.

Jane Grayson covers all of this ground quickly and efficiently in this short biography. Understandably there is little development of themes or in-depth literary criticism here, but the basic facts are laid out concisely. She stresses Nabokov's aloofness from political action and his butterfly-like agility in crossing borders between languages, literary styles and nations alike. Her own style is eminently readable and obvious errors are few (she places the rise of McCarthyism in the "late 1940s" although it did not begin until 1950 and a picture caption tells us that Boris Pasternak was "pressurized" into refusing the Nobel Prize for Literature). The pictures are mostly interesting, though there are a few that are only vaguely relevant to Nabokov's career.

Vladimir Nabokov was a colorful character, a brilliant teacher and a masterful writer in two languages. LOLITA put him on the literary map, but his other novels (PNIN, PALE FIRE, ADA) are worth reading too. If this little book leads more readers to them, it will have served a useful purpose.

--- Reviewed by Robert Finn

Nabokov's Lolita spawns from this short book, and it is fascinating to see the thought process behind the masterpiece. The book is translated to English from Russian, so some of the story may be lost. The Enchanter is a bit disappointing after finishing Lolita. Lolita is full of word play, imagery, allusion, and poetic prose, so finding the Enchanter to be merely a story with not much artistry in the language is almost sad! The storyline consists of little complexity, and the work is void of the characterization that draws the reader into Lolita. The narrator has none of the charisma that the brilliant Humbert Humbert possesses, and comes across simply as a villain. Nabokov's concept of the nymphet that left the term "Lolita" forever in the English vocabulary does not appear either. The young girl's character isn't developed at all; instead the reader gets nothing more than physical descriptions. Nabokov didn't intend the Enchanter for publication at all, it is merely a sketch of an idea he later developed for everyone's eyes. This book is worth reading, but without any expectations that Lolita may cause the reader to have. Perhaps it is better to read the Enchanter before reading Lolita.

Like many posthumous works, this first attempt by Nabokov to portray nymphet-love is more interesting to understand the author than as a reading in itself.

Here, the approach is blunter and in a way more shocking - unmitigated by the intellectual rigmaroles that veil the sexual content in "Lolita". The book's plot, with its desperate escape, is a simplified version of the fantastic voyage of Humbert and Dolores. And "The Enchanter" also lacks the mild, educated satire of Middle America which has been a suitable alibi for many readers of the later book.

In a way, "The Enchanter" is like a notebook sketch for "Lolita". It has its basic elements of a story, but none of its richness of colour.

I found this a difficult and disturbing novella: I was uncomfortable with it throughout and finished with a sense of relief, not only because the book ended, but also because of the way it ended.

Other reviews have pointed out that Nabokov was treading a narrow path between literature and pornography, and I could see their point. How anyone can find children sexually attractive is utterly beyond me. However, I think that the first presumption in literature should be one of tolerance - it would be a mistake, in my view, to dismiss "The Enchanter" as a work of pornography. It isn't - yet it's very challenging.

Nabokov examines the mind of a paedophile - in particular his inability to differentiate between fantasy and reality until it is too late. I would have been worried if I had not found the subject matter disturbing. What it did do was make me reflect why I found this novella so challenging, and why I found, for example, Thomas Mann's "Death in Venice" (which deals with a dying man's infatuation with a boy) so moving. I'll need to re-read "Death in Venice" to reflect more on this, but I think it's because in "Death in Venice" the attraction to the boy was the means by which von Aschenbach faced his own imminent demise, and realised that he'd denied his true nature throughout his life. There was no, as such, sexual possibility.

Also, I was reminded of a scene in William Corlett's "Now and Then" in which the main (gay) character shares a bedroom with his young and (I think, though memory may be unreliable) attractive nephew: the nephew enjoys undressing before his uncle, but the saving factor is that the uncle is in control of his life and emotions - he realises that this is merely the boy showing off, that it is not meant as a sexual advance.

What Nabokov does is examine the fact that for some disturbed individuals (males?), there is an inability to rationalise and separate fantasy from reality - and where the fastasy involves children, this is particularly dangerous. Children do not view the world through the same eyes as adults - I can remember in particular two incidents at school (one when I was 10, the other 15), when male teachers let's say, doted very obviously over particular girls. To us at that age, they appeared to be rather dirty and ridiculous old men (one was in his fifties, the other in his thirties). To my knowledge, nothing at all happended. I think what is important is that most of us, as we mature absorb such reflections made in our youth and use them as the foundations for controlling our behaviour as adults. Some however, fail to do this, as Nabokov demonstrated.

In a society where voilence against children seems to be growing, reading a work like "The Enchanter" is not easy, yet it is brave fiction, and if it makes one reflect and therefore learn, it has immense value.

I'm not axactly what you'd call a Nabokovian scholar; I read the book as part of a research paper. Nabokov and the Novel is extremely complicated to understand. Pifer is attempting to answer critics' attacks on Nabokov as far as style goes. (manipulating plots and characters, etc.) Her focus throughout the book is that Nabokov had a radical sense of what "real" is, and that affects all his novels. Read it to find out what it is 'cause it's highly philosophical, and I won't even attempt to summarize it! What I thought it lacked was a focus on what makes people love Nabokov in the first place: his unbelievable command of the English language, and his beautiful lyrical prose. I'm not in a position to refute Pifer's claims, but to me, Nabokov seems much more interested in saying what he wants to say than in his plot (and I don't- nor anyone I've spoken to about it find that "offensive" at all). The ideas she introduces may not be that original, but it was very interesting to see how she ties it all up in a neat bundle using so many examples from Nabokov's English and Russian novels.

nabokov, while being a superb writer of fiction, isn't the best poet there is. i'm not saying the poems in this collection were bad, just nothing spectacular. (the chess problems on the other hand were a joke, way too easy)

which is a shame because, like many other fiction writers, he found great dissapointment in the world not viewing him as a poet. but, once again, it's because he didn't produce that many stellar poems. it was interesting to see a well-known translator translate his own work. it has to bring something new to the world of translation. i wonder if it has any special problems...

I really feel that the first review I wrote was not specific enough, and for that I do apologize. As a long time rereader of Nabokov, the thing that MOST glaringly turned me off about Mr. Wood's book was his propensity to incorrectly refer to the original Nabokov text. (Example: On page 208 Wood writes, "...and the word [incest] hovers in the children's Scrabble games (insect, scient, incest)..." The incest, scient, nicest word play is on page 85 of the Vintage editon. Ada is playing anagrams with her governess on pencil and paper. The Scrabble game enters the novel on page 223 and the ensuing game makes no reference to incest. I know it seems a nitpicky criticism, but the detail is all.) I opened with his chapter on Ada, as that was the book I was most involved in, and was immediately turned off by his lack of precision. I skimmed some of his critique of the short stories, but then gave up on the whole thing. When writing the previous review, I believed that any attentive Nabokovian would agree with me, but it appears I have erred, and possibly offended. I must admit that even Mr. Boyd gave Mr. Wood a certain amount of credit as a scholar in the opening of his most recent book. So...so I've reread the Ada chapter and looked at a few other chapters and I still can't bring my self to think that's this book is good for much more than helping me solidify my opinions of VN's work by refuting about 95% of Wood's arguements. Apologies for my too strong condemnation, it was ridiculous, but I still do not like this book.

Please don't support Wood's little Dabble-Fest. He didn't read any Nabokov more than once. You are a thousands times better of if you go with Brian Boyd's biographies.

I've been reading Nabokov for about 27 years, and re-reading it just as long, including almost every novel, short story, essay, and criticism I could find, as well as the Boyd two-volume biography, to which the previous customer referred. While Boyd's work is thorough and might be called "definitive," Wood's book is purposefully limited in scope. However, I certainly found in-depth analyses of the points and themes Wood chose. The subtitle of this book should also inform the prospective reader, i.e., "Nabokov and the Risks of Fiction." The book is made up of relatively short (the entire paperback is only about 250 pages), somewhat overlapping critical analyses regarding a specific point in six of VN's novels, two short stories, and his translation of EUGENE ONEGIN. Perhaps a few examples from the table of contents will help clarify: 3. The Cruelty of Chance: BEND SINISTER, 'Signs and Symbols', 'The Vane Sisters'; 4. The World Without Us: SPEAK MEMORY; 5. The Language of LOLITA; 8. The Demons of our Pity: PALE FIRE; 9. Happy Families: ADA. I have underlined so much of Wood's text and written so much in the margins that it is difficult to pick out a single example that might illuminate Wood's approach. But here's a try: In "The Language of LOLITA" Wood approaches the novel from Nabokov's games and play with language, and uses them to go into the many oppositions, ironies, and mysteries that abound in the book. For example, Wood cites the passage, "No matter, even if those eyes of hers would swell to myopic fish, and her nipples swell and crack...even then I would still go mad with tenderness at the mere sight of your dear wan face, at the mere sound of your raucous voice, my Lolita." Wood notes the apposition of "wan" and "raucous"; and then goes on with his analysis (within the context of this and other previous essays), "[these] are the notations of desperate love, and Humbert writes here the purest, most precise Nabokovian prose. What we question is not [Humbert's] passion but his supposed new respectability. The whole of [LOLITA] has been asking us to trust Humbert's obsession, even as we are repelled by it. We can't leave off trusting it now...[when the obsession] is so lyrically mourning what it claims it won't miss." Wood goes on to say that it may not be necessary for us to believe what Humbert believes at the end. "Indeed we may understand his crime more fully if we are sceptical about his repentence and altered love...It is easy to confess...and it may actually be to Humbert's credit that he is not entirely convincing in this line, in spite of his ambitions." These critical essays clearly are not meant to go into deep and thorough dissertations of a given work by Nabokov. Rather, I feel Wood is trying to give an overview of Nabokov by examining these particular works, each with a different, purposefully limited thesis. Wood may offend some Nabokov lovers perhaps because he does point out specific places in which he finds VN's prose and/or approach lacking or perhaps too gamesy for its own good. On the whole, however, I found Wood's book an excellent example of literary criticism "dedicated to the appreciation and interpretation of a single author, addressed to the general reader," to quote David Lodge from THE NEW YORK TIMES REVIEW OF BOOKS. I am also in agreement with John Banville of THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, who writes, "[Wood's book] offers us an entirely new set of insights into the work of a modern master." I feel this book is a MUST for the reader who is, say, on his/her second or third book by Nabokov. Yet I would also recommend MAGICIAN'S DOUBTS to anyone who is thoroughly familiar with Nabokov's life, his work, and its criticism for a fresh, cogent look at some of VN's work. I found it an especially good book for aspiring writers, as Wood dissects many of Nabokov's techniques, such as the way VN uses inversion, the use of connected references to accrue power, surface detail to reveal the object's depth, and how VN maintains the mystery in his work without losing its narrative drive. For myself, I most enjoyed reading THE MAGICIAN'S DOUBTS with the subject of each chapter (i.e., the particular Nabokov work) alongside, re-examining with delight the points and overall themes Wood expresses so elegantly in this compact but dense-with-insight book.