Bring on the tough stuff - there’s not just one right answer.
How do the various narrative techniques at work here – memory, magical realism, the disruption of time, unreliable narrator – all work together to form a cohesive whole in "Spring in Fialta"?
Some people argue that with highly artful works, such as "Spring in Fialta," the art overwhelms the content. That is, we’re so busy admiring Nabokov for being a literary god that we can’t see the tragedy in Victor’s unrequited desire; we’re so busy oohing and ahhing over the narrative technique (see question one) that we miss the humanity in the characters. Interestingly, NY Times Movie Critic "The Carpetbagger" said the same thing about Daniel Day-Lewis’s 2008 Oscar-winning performance in There Will Be Blood. He was so caught up in the "acting choices" and artful prowess that he couldn’t get emotionally invested in the character. What do you think about this argument with respect to "Spring in Fialta?"
That was quite a question. We’re just going to chill out for a minute.
Which character best garners the reader’s sympathy in "Spring in Fialta," Victor or Nina?