Ron Rosenbaum has finally gone to read his white whale-sort of, more like his, hmm, forbidden lust object?-, Nabokov's Laura, which will be published in November and, until then, is locked in a room at Random House. The book will be a collection of Nabokov's 138 index cards for the novel, reproduced-and perforated for detachment and shuffling. (Somehow the book is listed as "304 pages.") Also? It turns out they are mostly illegible.
This is how Rosenbaum describes the contents of the book:
Somehow, without giving the impression that he was frenetically trying to conceal his process, he has completely obscured various words and phrases that it appears he's altered or deleted from the text. These fragments are all but impossible to decipher beneath the scrolling, spiraling curls of his scrawls, which look like Slinkys (although I know that many in future years will try).Oh boy!It was pretty remarkable. I spent a lot of time trying to make anything out, and I swear the only effacement I may have deciphered occurs in the faint shadow of the erased smudge on the index card on Page 233. It's not in Dmitri [Nabakov]'s transcript, and V.N. himself obviously decided he didn't want it there (at the time, anyway), but I thought I could make out two words in the deletion the transcript may have missed: "the coded."

Little do they realize this is the finished book. It was the only way he could one-up 'Pale Fire' conceptually.
*snickers with smug self-satisfaction
Oops, you got a dangling asterism there. Or is this a new conceptismo I'm not familiar with yet?
I never put periods on implicated actions.
You'd think that someone writing about Nabokov would be, umm, more fastidious.
I love Nabokov and have read many of his novels and all his short stories, so is it wrong that I have next to zero interest in reading this thing?
I think at the end of the day this will be as edifying to Nabokov enthusiasts -- and I am one -- as "Eyes Wide Shut" was to Kubrick's disappointed avids.
Good analogy. And it makes me grateful that at least we're getting the incomplete version and not something finished by, say, Jonathan Safran Foer.
I feel the exact same way! Those Slate pieces on it just killed it for me.
Ron Rosenbaum has written some great stuff (Explaining Hitler is excellent), but his pieces on Slate sound like they're written by a flailing old man.
"Heetlah! You got some 'splainin' to do!"
Baba-jew!
What if they threw in a couple of Nabakov's grocery lists as an added incentive?
THEN WHAT WOULD YOU PAY?
My favorite "flailing old man" Ron Rosenbaum piece was the one he wrote for The Observer years ago attacking "Almost Famous" for being too self-consciously cool a movie. The whole review smelled of moth balls and sadness.