The article on the translation of Eugene Onegin into English was truly engaging and enjoyable.

It made me delve into the fascinating world of translation and the unique perspectives that different translators bring.

I found myself especially intrigued by the mention of Nabokov and his use of index cards.

The image of him meticulously organizing his thoughts and ideas on those cards is both charming and inspiring.

It makes me wonder about the creative process that goes into translating a complex and beloved work like Eugene Onegin.

Now, my curiosity has been piqued about Lolita as well.

I can't help but wonder how Nabokov's translation style and approach might have influenced his writing of this other famous novel.

I look forward to exploring Lolita and uncovering the secrets and nuances that lie within its pages.

A budding critic would say: learn to distinguish between the banal and the profound. Remember that mediocrity thrives on ideas. Beware of trendy messages. Ask yourself if the symbol you have discovered is not just the imprint of your own foot. Ignore allegories. At all costs, put the "how" above the "what". Trust the sudden erection of the hairs on your back. At this point, don't bring Freud into it. Everything else depends on personal talent. (Vladimir Nabokov, Intransigence. 1973)

Nabokov was considered a reclusive, elitist man: saying so means nothing, but fortunately he explains it better. In interviews, Nabokov wants to know the questions first and prepares the answers in advance. He admits that he is not inclined towards improvisation, he is not a great talker, and he envies spontaneity in speech. This, he says, his wife also knows. When he starts to tell her a dream or an event of the day, he stops in the middle of the story, making long and repeated "uhm uhm", in search of the exact image. The interviewer points out to him that his "embarrassment" does not prevent him from being a very good university professor of literature. He replies that these are lectures that he has learned by heart, prepared and elaborated over decades, so he never improvises anything. This aspect of Nabokov puts the interlocutor at ease, almost makes him feel tenderness, like a character of Nabokov himself, Pnin, one of his most touching novels, or when he admits that he has no ear for music and struggles at concerts, a thing that deeply saddens him. Then Nabokov becomes the intransigent one again, the one who cannot stand sloppiness, swear words, he does not say them and does not write them, he has never been drunk in his life, he does not consider himself an interesting man for the public, he does not belong to any circle, "the things I hate are simple: stupidity, oppression, crime, cruelty, light music". He loves butterflies and writing. As a reader, he does not read mysteries, science fiction, fantasy, noir. The volume published by Adelphi is a long, splendid, anomalous, literature lesson. Authoritative as Nabokov knew how to be. His books of the 20th century are "Ulysses" by Joyce, the first part of "In Search of Lost Time" by Proust, "The Metamorphosis" by Kafka. Of Russian novels, he loves "Anna Karenina", he cannot stand some great writers whom he considers humorous and sentimental. Of Dostoyevsky, he says that he was a journalist inclined towards writing, excessive, clumsy and vulgar, that his prostitutes with a great soul and his killers with a tender heart are unbearable. He forgets the fact that Dostoyevsky, whether one likes it or not, also wrote short works of great precision such as "The Meek One" or "Notes from Underground". He loves Flaubert. The greatest novels of the 19th century such as "Madame Bovary" and "Anna Karenina" are stories of imagination that ended badly. With Faulkner, he is particularly unfair when he refers to the "corncob chronicles of Faulkner", alluding to the rape in "Sanctuary" (1931) in which a girl is violated with a corncob. He forgets that Faulkner had written in 1929 a geometrically perfect book like "The Sound and the Fury", still today among the masterpieces of the 20th century, in 1930 he had published "As I Lay Dying" and in 1932 "Light in August". Novels impressive for their expressive power. He never cites "The Man Without Qualities" by Robert Musil, one of the most important books of the 20th century. It is true that it is a digressive novel that does not end, in which a hypercritical man is not satisfied with the earthly life of relationships nor with the religious messages of an afterlife. Perhaps it should have been titled "The Incontentability", but it remains among the most pressing and acute of all.

Nabokov returns again and again to the concept of Poshlust, a broad term that he takes from Gogol, difficult to define. For Nabokov, Poshlust is everything that maneuvers and resides in the lazy contemporary minds, inclined to automatisms, including the appeal to myths and Freudian symbolism, "philistinism in all its phases, the false depths, the crude, idiotic and dishonest pseudo-literature, Poshlust nests in sociological comments, in messages in favor of humanity, in the excessive attention to race or class and in the generic journalism that we all know."

- In what language does he think? (asks the interviewer).

- I don't think in any language, I think in images. I don't believe that people think in a language. I think in images and from time to time the foam of the cerebral waves forms a sentence in Russian or in English, but that's all.

Strong Opinions is truly an outstanding barometer for gauging one's level of Nabokov fandom. It is a compilation of his interviews and articles, with the majority being the former.

If through frequent and obsessive readings of his novels and stories, you have come to tolerate or even love his personality, there is a high likelihood that you will thoroughly enjoy this collection. However, if you haven't reached that point, chances are you'll be inclined to throw this book out the window and perhaps even vandalize N's Wikipedia page as a form of retaliation for having to endure even a small portion of the aristocratic ramblings of one of the world's preeminent aesthetes.

I firmly belong to the former camp. Although I might occasionally roll my eyes, I am generally quite charmed by his snobbish insistence on artistic excellence. As I read, I would jot down the authors he recommended, as N's approval is essentially the gold standard for me when it comes to choosing what to read next. Moreover, his snobbishness and aloofness are an inevitable byproduct of his erudite and superbly expressed opinions.

The only genuine drawback is that a significant number of the interviews cover the same ground. I wish N, who edited this, had omitted the repeat questions. Half the time, I felt like strangling certain interviewers for asking questions he had already been asked countless times or for seeking his opinions on topics he had already expressed his disdain for. Consequently, reading it straight through can be a bit of a chore. Instead, I would recommend perusing an interview here and there.

Some of the essays are extremely interesting, especially the one on inspiration. However, the ones where N is setting the record straight against Edmund Wilson and Maurice Girodias don't read as well when you don't have the articles he is responding to. Additionally, the section on lepidoptera is a bit lost on me. Nevertheless, it is a great resource to have when re-reading N's novels, especially the two excellent interviews with Alfred Appel, as they offer some nice insights. Definitely for Nabokov fanatics only, though.

Nabokov is truly an individual like no other, a remarkable and often cantankerous figure. I was astonished to find myself in agreement with a plethora of his opinions. His views on identity politics, his take on Death in Venice, his scathing remarks about the stupidity of the extreme left in America, and even his stance on what he terms'soft music' all resonated with me. However, I am certain that if I were to encounter him in real life, I might not have held him in very high regard. His lack of modesty and his apparent aversion to hedonism would likely have grated on me. And yet, there is something undeniably hilarious about him. His humor is like a wonderful salve, capable of redeeming even the most serious of topics.

The book itself is extremely serious, especially when it delves into the minutiae of word-by-word analysis. But despite this, the overall picture is infused with a delicious irreverence and a kind of mad joy. There were numerous passages that had me laughing out loud. This is one of those rare books that I know I will return to time and time again. It is also a book that has made me feel as though I have become a better person simply by reading it.

In my early twenties, I read this book not just once but many times.

I was filled with a keen and intense desire to understand clearly what it was that I should admire and what it was that I should disdain.

This book seemed to hold the answers I was seeking, and I devoured its pages with great enthusiasm.

Each time I turned the page, I felt as if I was getting closer to uncovering the secrets that would guide my moral compass.

I was determined to learn from the stories and characters within the book, to glean the wisdom that would help me make better judgments in life.

As I read and re-read, I found myself reflecting on my own values and beliefs, and comparing them to those presented in the book.

It was a journey of self-discovery and growth, and one that I will always remember.

The book became my trusted companion, and I am grateful for the insights it provided me during that formative period of my life.

This is a truly remarkable collection of ideas that is both highly enjoyable and, at times, rather showy.

The concepts presented within it are nothing short of outrageous, yet they manage to captivate the reader's attention and imagination.

Each idea seems to push the boundaries of what is considered normal or acceptable, adding an element of excitement and intrigue.

However, one cannot help but notice that some of the ideas may be more for show than substance.

They have a certain allure and sparkle, but upon closer inspection, they may lack the depth and solidity that would make them truly great.

Nevertheless, this collection is still a fascinating read that offers a unique perspective on various topics.

It challenges the reader to think outside the box and consider ideas that they may never have thought of before.

Whether you agree with all of the ideas or not, there is no denying that this collection is a thought-provoking and entertaining one.

I'm not precisely certain what I had imagined Nabokov was doing with all the butterfly-related things. If I had ever given it much thought before reading this book, perhaps I visualized the plump genius clumsily dancing around a hillside, vigorously swiping at Glamour Moths with a net like the ones I've only seen depicted in cartoons. But as it turns out, capturing his prey was only half the enjoyment. N. slips into the passive voice for this revelation: "Each butterfly, killed by an expert nip of its thorax, is slipped immediately into a little glazed envelope…"

Jesus, Vlad. You can say whatever you want about Franzen and his pathological need to kiss birds, but at least Mr. Difficult doesn't directly murder the fluttering objects of his affection.

After several dozen alpine killings, N. would conclude his kill-crazy idylls with hours of fussy, magnifying-glass-enhanced inspection of his dead pals' junk/Shameful Generative Organs. Which is why in every one of his English-language novels, a shadowy figure named Tom Chidk appears in various guises. This, of course, is an anagram for M-O-T-H D-I-C-K. Although Edmund Wilson went to his grave believing that Chidk was actually a sophisticated literary device of Nabokov's invention, one the author used to surreptitiously poke fun at Wilson's sexual impotence. (No surprise that Wilson got it so wrong; this, after all, was the same critic who failed to recognize that Pale Fire is a 316-page palindrome. Yep, the entire novel is one unbroken palindrome. For real. Seriously, go look. […] When you come back, I'll deny I ever said anything.)

And yes, Franzen himself has very likely examined the odd cloaca, but there's no way he's going to introduce a convex lens to what's already a rather strange situation.

Probably a whole lot stranger for the bird, now that I've had some time to think about it.

Despite the diverse subjects of his other works, Nabokov is surprisingly and shockingly funny. What's more, he is even more rudely opinionated, which, strangely enough, I find rather amusing. However, I do have a slight reservation about the format of this particular book. It consists of two-thirds extracts from interviews and one-third letters and book reviews. Somehow, this format gives me the impression that it feels a bit cheapening. Of course, Nabokov is no longer alive to produce a revised edition. But if it were possible, I would have loved to see a compendium of micro-essays, perhaps similar to JB Priestley's "Delight", or even some of his lectures reproduced within these pages. It would have added a different dimension and depth to the collection, and might have made it a truly outstanding work.

“I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child.” - With this highly evocative statement, Nabokov begins the book “Strong Opinions”. And this is extremely important information - the author, who was able to handle the written language in such a wonderful way, was not a very good speaker. Public appearances stressed him out a great deal, so in the vast majority of cases, he did not give “live” interviews (he even read his lectures from pre-prepared notes). We know, then, that the interviews placed in this volume were conducted in a correspondence manner - journalists sent questions, to which VN replied. Thanks to this, we can be sure that the author's words are deeply considered, and all the texts that appear in this collection were personally selected by Vladimir.

The first part of the book consists of 22 interviews for various magazines (Playboy, The New York Times, and Vogue are just some of the well-known ones). This was really a great pleasure for me - after all, the image of the writer can transform from just a name on the cover to a living person with that “strong opinion”. Nabokov himself admits in the preface that fiction gives him so little room to share his opinions that sometimes he enjoys this form of communication. So we get to know Nabokov as a witty and mysterious respondent; one who expresses literary criticism sharply; one who is outraged by the behavior of some and charmed by the behavior of others. He mentions his love for America, family, chess, and butterflies. He talks about the future and plans for the present; about his daily habits. We are close to the man himself, not just the writer, which I really liked (and which will surely appeal to anyone who reads interviews with people they like).

The second part of the book contains eleven letters from VN (or Véry? Iykyk) to the editors. Their subject matter is very diverse - from refusing to participate in a literary event, to criticizing an article published in a newspaper, to being outraged because of a disrespectful opinion about his father. It is a quick read, and some of the texts are seriously funny (

He constantly repeats himself, and he is extremely mean.

The Nabokov who once hid in the alcoves of his literature now parades around as if seeking a mate with his venomous plumage.

I used to delight in the way he demolished his enemies and with such confidence established his own literary canon.

Even now, it can still be amusing at times to witness him fling insults.

However, this isn't good criticism, nor does it convey anything of practical value, other than the fact that as a person, he had his own viewpoints.

It would be better to focus on the lectures for the combination of praise and analysis, or on the fiction for the intersection of beautiful prose and imagination.

It is humorous, it is well-written, but all too seldom is it anything more than that.

Perhaps we should look beyond the surface and strive to understand the deeper layers of his work and his character.

Only then can we truly appreciate the genius that is Nabokov.

The most beautiful thing in the world is reading - Nabokov recalls his childhood and talks about those he loves.

At all other times, Nabokov is a very unsympathetic person. He dirties everyone and exalts his own genius.

So the title is very honest and we must give credit where it is due.

Reading is truly a wonderful thing. It allows us to escape into different worlds, experience different emotions, and learn new things. Nabokov's love for reading is evident in his works, which are filled with beautiful language and vivid descriptions.

When we read, we can also connect with the author on a deeper level. We can understand their thoughts and feelings, and perhaps even be inspired by them. Nabokov's childhood memories and his love for those close to him are surely a source of inspiration for many readers.

In conclusion, reading is not only a form of entertainment but also a way to enrich our lives. We should all make time for reading and discover the beauty and wisdom that lies within the pages of a good book.

Strong Opinions is an engaging compilation that consists of interviews, essays, and letters. It showcases Vladimir Nabokov expressing his firm, sometimes grouchy, and often intelligent views on a wide range of topics.

Perhaps you have read his autobiography, Speak, Memory, which details the early years of his life. However, it doesn't cover the period when he became most renowned for writing masterpieces like Lolita, Pnin, Pale Fire, and Ada. Although he occasionally mentioned writing a second memoir, he never did. This makes a book like Strong Opinions even more captivating as it reveals different aspects of his later life through various mediums such as interviews, book reviews, letters to editors, and Lepidoptera papers.

The interviews are particularly fascinating and offer better reading than expected. This is mainly due to an unusual condition Nabokov imposed on journalists. They had to submit their questions in advance, and he would write detailed responses that they had to publish. Reporters could talk to him, but only direct quotations from these written responses were permitted. As a result, each interview reads like a series of short essays, allowing Nabokov the freedom to expound on everything from the proper pronunciation of character names to his intended interpretations of his novels and even his gripes about music. They provide a unique perspective on the man, his working methods, and his sense of humor.

The rest of the book is a bit more inconsistent. The letters are interesting once you have some background knowledge, and the essays are more academic than literary, yet they are still enjoyable to read.

Overall, Strong Opinions is a great read for Nabokov enthusiasts who wish to gain a deeper understanding of the author from multiple angles, including his work as a lepidopterist. However, if you're not already a fan, this book may not convert you. It's advisable to start with Speak, Memory or one of his novels first.