additional memories in response. The cycle that results could be called a dialectic of
a collaborative, "dialogic"
321) effort at building a satisfactory
What possible bearing on Pale Five could "Constructions in Analysis" have?
After all, Kinbote is hardly interested in any kind of dialogue with Shade's person or
poem. As a parody of the Freudian analyst, he draws exclusively from his own
repressions, obsessions, and desires in interpreting the latent content behind the
manifest material of "Pale Fire," constructing a self-validating narrative aimed at his
own glorification and immortalization. If anything, he provides a living example of
the latter day Freud taken to his logical extreme, where an analyst who once ignored,
denied, or downplayed his own repressions now justifies and defends them. Indeed,
Kinbote subverts the analytic roles to his advantage, first becoming patient in the
hope that Shade "would recreate in a poem the dazzling Zembla burning in my brain"
and then, when the poem turns out to be "Pale Fire" and not
swapping the patient's couch for the analyst's chair in offering a construction where
he is the poem's protagonist and hero. Though Kinbote partly faults Shade for failing
to tell his story
he mostly blames Sybil, his competitor for Shade's attention
and a rank "anti-Karlist" (74) who certainly must have encouraged her husband to
strike out any references to Charles Xavier and his Zembla (91). Claiming that this
"domestic censor" (81) of resistance has suppressed Shade's intended utterance
simultaneously empowers Kinbote as the poem's
and protects even
the most outlandish of his claims from criticism.
Thank you to John Limon for this apt and useful articulation.