I think that's the simple answer, yes; but it's not the only one. Kafka and Hemingway were both published posthumously against their express wishes, for example. The argument goes "what right have the dead to deprive the literary world?" (and implies "if they didn't want it read, they shouldn't have left it behind").
Honouring the wishes of the dead really only speaks to the living, and I'm not sure it sends a valid message.
I was about to mention that I found reading Kafka's unfinished "The Castle" a somewhat frustrating experience.
It starts extraordinarily well, but by the time we get to the part where it stops abruptly, the writing style is nowhere near as good (as much as can be determined from a translation; sadly my German is not up to my reading the original); it really looks like the earlier parts were extensively revisited and the later parts merely roughed out. Continuing on to read the fragments only included with later editions was a decidedly bad call; at least earlier editions stopped at a seeming impasse, rather than in the midst of tantalising hints as to what was to come.
Publishing a poor example of his work post-humously would be (to him) a sullying of his work record.
Doing anything posthumously is not really going to be anything "to him"; rather, it represents something to his literary estate. In this case, his literary executor apparently sees more to be gained from publishing.
I saw the article a while ago, and wasn't sure what I thought then. I now thik the way to go is that neither answer is quite the right one. The "great lost novel" is plainly nothing of the sort. It's sketches for my sweetheart, the drunk. I think it probably shouldn't be destroyed or published in its own right. Rather, it should be made available to Nabokov scholars and maybe added as some foot note to a scholarly edition of his works. That kind of thing. To publish it, is to in effect claim it's complete. Not such a good or honest thing.
Despite the somewhat tongue-in-cheek position I take in this post, I'm not really favour of destroying knowledge. I think your suggestion is the sensible one (although I'm not sure publication necessarily implies "completeness"), just not necessarily the most interesting one.
It would be interesting to see if Vlad's wishes were put into a will. Not many courts will go against a dead person's wishes (providing they are legal).
If Vlad made a formal wish for Laura to be burnt and not to be published - then so be it.
Doesn't sound like he specified who or when it should be burned - so it could be kept indefinitely - hahaha
As I understand it, he merely marked the manuscript "To be destroyed if unfinished", as he initially did with the ms. for Look at the Harlequins! (and then crossed out once he was satisfied with it).
It is not a bad read. The language and style is far more interesting than the subject matter and storyline.
I did it as an assignment at school to give the teachers a stir - hahahha
I put it in the same category as Henry Miller and Anais Nin - initially interesting *because of all the controversy - but actually beautifully written.
Comments 16
Reply
Honouring the wishes of the dead really only speaks to the living, and I'm not sure it sends a valid message.
Reply
It starts extraordinarily well, but by the time we get to the part where it stops abruptly, the writing style is nowhere near as good (as much as can be determined from a translation; sadly my German is not up to my reading the original); it really looks like the earlier parts were extensively revisited and the later parts merely roughed out. Continuing on to read the fragments only included with later editions was a decidedly bad call; at least earlier editions stopped at a seeming impasse, rather than in the midst of tantalising hints as to what was to come.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Isn't that the way publishers and cash hungry estate executors always operate...?
They certainly do in the SF&F world (Tolkien, Herbert).
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Doing anything posthumously is not really going to be anything "to him"; rather, it represents something to his literary estate. In this case, his literary executor apparently sees more to be gained from publishing.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
It would be interesting to see if Vlad's wishes were put into a will. Not many courts will go against a dead person's wishes (providing they are legal).
If Vlad made a formal wish for Laura to be burnt and not to be published - then so be it.
Doesn't sound like he specified who or when it should be burned - so it could be kept indefinitely - hahaha
Reply
As I understand it, he merely marked the manuscript "To be destroyed if unfinished", as he initially did with the ms. for Look at the Harlequins! (and then crossed out once he was satisfied with it).
it could be kept indefinitely
Sneaky! :)
Reply
If you've never read it how could it put you off?
Reply
Reply
I did it as an assignment at school to give the teachers a stir - hahahha
I put it in the same category as Henry Miller and Anais Nin - initially interesting *because of all the controversy - but actually beautifully written.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment