Thread 24851460

>doesn't like allegory
>likes the metamorphosis
How does that work?

Read his "analysis" of metamorphosis, he doesn't even realize an allegory is there. It's literally worse than what you would expect from a disillusioned high schooler who didn't even read the book.
Nabokov is a pseud through and through, the only reason he was remembered is because he was edgy.

>>24851460 (OP)
"Allegory" generally has social or moral or philosophical connotation. The Metamorphosis is perhaps metaphorical, but it's not allegorical unless you're college student trying to pad out an essay.

>>24851502
It's not an allegory retard.

>>24851460 (OP)
Schopenhauer clearly explains why allegory and categorical description is the path poetry needs to express Ideas and become sublime. Its not the case in pictorial or plastic art, but in writing allegory and metaphor are indispensable

What's it an allegory for?

Metamorphosis is expressionist not allegorical

>>24851460 (OP)
>"Nothing bores me more than political novels"
>writes Bend Sinister

>>24851460 (OP)
The Metamorphosis isn't an allegory.

Would Nabokov have hated Joseph Heller?

>>24851502
>because he was edgy.
He has the most mainstream views imaginable, how is he edgy?

>>24851460 (OP)
There's no allegory. Samsa just literally turned into a bug. Isn't that crazy? What a wacky situation to find oneself in!

>>24851635
OwO

>>24851625
then how come i relate to it so thoroughly despite never transforming into a bug?

>>24851882
Off yourself.

>>24851502
This.

>>24851882
live, have a long and happy life!

>>24851460 (OP)
The NEET male is considered a disgusting bug in the eyes of humanity.

>>24851833
>He has the most mainstream views imaginable
Objectively false. Which of your favorite author did he dislike?

>>24851502
He's the finest prose stylist of the 20th century in any language. That's why we remember him.

>>24852088
No he's not. Grow up.

>>24852091
Retard

>>24852034
None that I know of and he's one of my favorite authors. Can you list a few of his supposedly fringe beliefs or opinions?

>>24851460 (OP)
When it's good it's good.

>>24852671
Hating Dosto and many other acclaimed writers for starters...

>>24852912
I guarantee you the vast majority of people would hate Dostoyevsky if they could be made to read him. Is having preferences what counts for edgy these days? I'd say Tolkien's dislike of Dune is more fringe even if he was completely right, and no one calls him edgy.

>>24851635
Modern human relationships. Gregor's family is used to depending on him and take him and his efforts for granted, and the moment he undergoes this strange experience, they're left to their own devices and resent him for it. Take the transformation into a creature however you like, e.g., depression, neurosis, etc. It matches Kafka's own insecurities to a T, and Kafka had the notion of publishing it alongside The Stoker and The Judgement in a volume called The Sons.

>>24851502
>>24851625
It is really semantics on how you view allegory. It is literally about a breadwinner of a household who turns into an unwanted bug and everyone he supported turns on him. That’s not even symbolism. It is literally the plot of the book

>>24853340
Couldn't you level that criticism at quite a few symbolic or allegorical stories, e.g., Aesop's Fables? The Boy Who Cried Wolf is straightforward in its brief plot as well.

>>24852912
Nabokov has written in significant detail why he doesn't care for Dostoevsky.
Meanwhile here you are, a pea-brained little shrimp whining about the man "hating" on your favourite author.

>>24852034
>Anon says his views are mainstream, so Nabokov must have disliked one of his authors
>>24852912
>Nabokov hated this anon's favorite author, which is what makes Nabokov's views fringe or edgy

>>24851882
Live with one foot in the grave.

>>24853900
>>24853944
I don't like Dosto either retards but in the literary world that's far from a mainstream opinion

>>24852300
>oh no he used 20 words I don't know in a row to talk about rape, pedophilia or nihilism! What could be better?

>>24852896
That cartoon would be funnier if the caption read "please, ma'am, no meat touching."

>>24851882
ywnbaw

>>24851900
>>24853948
>>24854779
trannies live rent free in the chud's head :3

>>24851460 (OP)
>How does that work?
Well Nabokov really liked insects, and Metamorphosis has one for a protagonist.

So who has the correct interpretation?

>Like much of Kafka's work, The Metamorphosis tends to be given a religious (Max Brod) or psychological interpretation. It has been particularly common to read the story as an expression of Kafka's father complex, as was first done by Charles Neider in his The Frozen Sea: A Study of Franz Kafka (1948). Besides the psychological approach, interpretations focusing on sociological aspects, which see the Samsa family as a portrayal of general social circumstances, have also gained a large following.

>Vladimir Nabokov rejected such interpretations, noting that they do not live up to Kafka's art. He instead chose an interpretation guided by the artistic detail but excluded any symbolic or allegoric meanings. Arguing against the popular father-complex theory, he observed that it is the sister more than the father who should be considered the cruelest person in the story, since she is the one backstabbing Gregor. In Nabokov's view, the central narrative theme is the artist's struggle for existence in a society replete with narrow-minded people who destroy him step by step. Commenting on Kafka's style, he writes, "The transparency of his style underlines the dark richness of his fantasy world. Contrast and uniformity, style and the depicted, portrayal and fable are seamlessly intertwined".

>In 1989, Nina Pelikan Straus wrote a feminist interpretation of The Metamorphosis, noting that the story is not only about the metamorphosis of Gregor but also about the metamorphosis of his family and, in particular, his younger sister Grete. Straus suggested that the social and psychoanalytic resonances of the text depend on Grete's role as a woman, daughter, and sister, and that prior interpretations failed to recognize Grete's centrality to the story.

>>24851882
transition... into... bug?

Metamorphosis is about a man turning into a giant bug, who is then shunned and abandoned by his family thanks to his inability to provide. It's not an allegory if the message is also the most literal reading of the text.

>>24855402
Literal bullshit

so bored and tired of reading kafcucks dad cucklex

>>24851460 (OP)
>>24851502
>>24851576
>In reading, one should notice and fondle details. There is nothing wrong about the moonshine of generalization when it comes after the sunny trifles of the book have been lovingly collected. If one begins with a readymade generalization, one begins at the wrong end and travels away from the book before one has started to understand it. Nothing is more boring or more unfair to the author than starting to read, say, Madame Bovary, with the preconceived notion that it is a denunciation of the bourgeoisie. We should always remember that the work of art is invariably the creation of a new world, so that the first thing we should do is to study that new world as closely as possible, approaching it as something brand new, having no obvious connection with the worlds we already know. When this new world has been closely studied, then and only then let us examine its links with other worlds, other branches of knowledge.

he favored reading works as particular stories first without tying them to the world of generalities. many readers who jump on the latter miss very important details like who made the frame of the picture in gregor's room. they also attribute symbolic intent to things where there is none. he disliked allegories because they are usually bare bones as stand alone stories, metamorphosis is not. he was perfectly aware of how the story could be related to other people's lives, which his entomological rant on gregor never using the wings that he probably has was ultimately a segue for:
>Some Gregors, some Joes and Janes, do not know that they have wings.

simple, it's not an allegory.

>>24853357
You absolutely could. It depends what you view as symbolism.

>>24855915
Explain yourself.

>>24851460 (OP)
How the FUCK did he get away with publishing a book about a man fucking a prepubecsent girl? How was he not ostracized and pedo-hunted for the rest of his days?

>>24856654
>How the FUCK did he get away with publishing a book about a man fucking a prepubecsent girl? How was he not ostracized and pedo-hunted for the rest of his days?

>>24856654
society was not yet fully gynocentric

>>24856672
>I don't have an answer, so I'll use a retard wojak!
I've seen people's lives utterly fucking destroyed for doing/writing less. People get thrown in prison for Japanese cartoons on their hard drive.

Kill all wojakniggers.

>>24856687
Answer for what? You being a complete and utter idiot?

>>24856696
You're fucking retarded. People in 1955 definitely were not okay with pedophilia. It's a story about a pedophile kidnapping and fucking a child and it's presented like a romance novel.

You're just yapping. You've clearly never even read it. Here's your (You), dipshit.

>>24856705
You don't need to keep doubling down on your stupidity. We already know you're an illiterate moron.

>>24856705
>and it's presented like a romance novel
that anon is right, you really are retarded.

>HURRRRR, I'M TROLLIN U
Here's your (You), shitheel.

>>24856714
Trolling?
Correctly labeling you a moron isn't trolling.
99% of this board would rightly infer that you're a complete idiot.

>>24851895
For me it's the trial

>>24856654
>>24856705
It's a story about a creep creeping on a little girl, and everyone but (You) read it correctly as a cautionary story about how a creepy old guy could be checking out your daughter this very moment, not as a romance. You have to be a literal 70 IQ retard to think the book in any way endorses pedophilia.