Invitation to a Beheading Review/Essay

If Nabokov had never written a word in English, he still would have been one of the 20th century’s great novelists.

A bold statement, indeed, and one that many people would have trouble agreeing with. To be sure, Lolita and Pale Fire are masterpieces, and Ada and Pnin are definitely great books. But did you know that Nabokov’s émigré novels outnumber those wrote in America 9 to 8 (or 10 – 7, if you count The Real Life of Sebastian Knight in the émigré camp)? At least three of these émigré works are masterpieces as well.

I’d like to shed some light on one of these émigré masterpieces, the strange and foreboding Invitation to a Beheading. It is a book that takes place almost completely within the confines of a dingy jail cell, and yet it wrestles with the same themes as vividly and profoundly as Nabokov's best known American novels.

Invitation to a Beheading is perhaps Nabokov's baldest examination of a theme which followed him throughout all his life and all his novels. This theme is the idea of the citizen who aspires to be different, the person who fails to assimilate, and the ways in which society either forces that divergent voice to join in lockstep, or extinguishes it.

***

Beheading’s plot is simple, and it is the imagination and empathy with which Nabokov invests this work that makes it worth returning to again and again. Cincinnatus C., denizen of a fictitious Eurasian nation, has been sentenced to execution for “gnostical turpitude”. Nabokov traces Cincinnatus’s life for nineteen days in prison, with Cincinnatus not knowing the day he will die, and on the twentieth day Cincinnatus is beheaded.

Cincinnatus's crime, “gnostical turpitude” is difficult to define; the best definition I’ve been able to work out is “depravity associated with disregard for matter”. Nabokov fleshes out this odd crime with a few dream-like episodes from Cincinnatus’s youth. These episodes are only slightly less obtuse than “gnostical turpitude”, but it appears that young Cincinnatus, to the absolute amazement of his schoolmates and the horrification of his elders, managed to levitate and perform other tricks that would indicate a general disregard for matter. In these snippets we get the sense that young Cincinnatus was ignorant of the extreme social norms that he was transgressing.

This crime that Cincinnatus commits is interesting in two ways, both of which have been taken up by authors such as Kafka, Orwell, and Huxley. First, there’s the fact that the only purpose of criminalizing this behavior is to force conformity. No one is injured by gnostical turpitude, there’s no overwhelming social interest in rooting it out. It seems simply to be imposed by decree.

The second reason is that this phrase's very impenetrability makes it so broad that can be conceivably applied to any behavior. Such an arbitrary and vague term seems expressly designed to be used by the government in snaring whoever it sees as a social malcontent.

Of course this theme has been worked before, as in Orwell’s “thoughtcrime”, or in Kafka’s The Trial, where poor Joseph K. never even gets to know the nature of his crime. The political elements in Invitation to a Beheading are certainly worth attention (especially since Nabokov wrote this in complete ignorance of Kafka, and before Kafka had even become well-known). However, what sets this novel apart from the panoply of dystopian fiction are the extra dimensions Nabokov imbues his work with.

***

Through Cincinnatus C. Nabokov demonstrates not only the tools of a totalitarian state, but the way in which any one of us can have our dignity stripped by the force of conformity. Early on, Cincinnatus questions the jail director as to when he will be executed, while the director helps himself to Cincinnatus’s dinner:

“So it may be tomorrow morning?” asked Cincinnatus.

“If you are interested,” said the director. “...Yes, downright delicious and most satisfying, that is what I will tell you. And now, pour la digestion, allow me to offer you a cigarette. Have no fear, at most this is only the one before last,” he added wittily.

All throughout the novel, Cincinnatus is trifled with by the jailers in a similar fashion. They eat his food, turn his cell into their office, drop by and joke with him, recruit him into their games; one jailer even dances with him. All the while Cincinnatus fights against these impositions, trying to simply know on what day he will die. All he finds, however, are more games.

It must be noted that Cincinnatus’s jailers never act with cruel intentions. They are seemingly as befuddled by Cincinnatus’s refusal to participate in their games as Cincinnatus is by their lack of interest in his plight. The jailers are jovial and playful, and they don't see why Cincinnatus won't accept the role they have imposed upon him. For Cincinnatus, refuses to accept this role is his last holdout against complete indignity.

It is through this inability to understand each other that Nabokov explores the ways in which a society can force indignity upon its members. Having no escape from the fortress, yet unwilling to participate in the jailers’ games, all Cincinnatus can do is keep an infinitely stiff upper lip, doggedly refusing to participate. Yet the jailers simply use Cincinnatus’s futile attempts at preserving his dignity as a way to further infantilize him, as in this scene where the director, and M’sieur Pierre (a fellow prisoner) have invaded Cincinnatus’s cell on the pretext of cheering him up:

“What were we talking about?” exclaimed M’sieur Pierre with charming tact, just as if nothing had happened. “Yes, we were talking about photographs. Some time I’ll bring my camera and take your picture. That will be fun. What are you reading? May I take a look?”

“You ought to put the book aside,” remarked the director with a rasp of exasperation in his voice; “after all, you do have a guest.”

“Oh, let him be,” smiled M’sieur Pierre.

There was a pause.

“It is growing late,” said the director after consulting his watch.

“Yes, we’ll be going in a minute...My, what a little grouch...Look at him, his little lips all atremble…any moment now the sun will peek out from behind the clouds...Grouch, grouch!...

“Let’s go,” said the director rising.

“Just a moment...I like it so much here I can hardly tear myself away...”

Bowing comically, in imitation of someone, M’sieur Pierre withdrew; the director once again took him by his elbow, emitting voluptuous nasal sounds. They left, but at the last minute his voice was head to say: “Excuse me, I forgot something, I’ll catch up with you in a moment,” and the director gushed back into the cell; he approached Cincinnatus, and for an instant the smile left his purple face: “I am ashamed,” he hissed through his teeth, “ashamed of you. You behaved like...I’m coming, I’m coming,” he yelled, beaming once again…”

Cincinnatus, like any non-conformist in a society full of conformists, is in a no-win situation. If he conforms -- plays his role in the little games that the jailers construct for him -- he loses his dignity. If he refuses to conform he is treated like a child and must abide by in anger. Nabokov’s genius is not simply to demonstrate this in such an apt way, but to derive true empathy for Cincinnatus’s plight. We truly do feel bad for poor, lonely Cincinnatus, cut off from all he loves, routinely humiliated, and persecuted for only being himself. It is this empathy which other fictions of the same genre often lack.

***

There is only one other character in Invitation to a Beheading who seems to have any sort of regard for Cincinnatus or understanding of his feelings. This is a character with a very minor role, a tiny voice that goes almost unnoticed. It is that of the jail’s librarian, a small man who provides Cincinnatus with books and who chooses to disengage when the jailers attempt to being him in on their games. The librarian represents Cincinnatus's assaulted, yet unrepetant imagination.

The only reprieve that Cincinnatus can find from the conformity and indignity of the jail is in his imagination. In Beheading, Cincinnatus's imagination is personified by books, the librarian, writing (which Cincinnatus occasionally indulges in), and flights of fancy. It is Cincinnatus's only beacon of hope, his only defense.

For instance, Cincinnatus's daydreams of freedom are a momentary escape. In his imagination, Cincinnatus finds himself roaming through the countryside at will, touring it all in perfect happiness. When his jailers take him to the top of the fortress and allow him to look out over the world from one of the jail’s high towers, Cincinnatus’s spirits soar as he lets his eyes roam free on “highly illegal excursions”.

Imagination, however, is also exactly what brought Cincinnatus to jail in the first place. In his “gnostic turpitude”, Cincinnatus failed to accept the world simply as it was given to him. He chose to penetrate matter, to try and enter the heart of things through his mind, and for this he was sentenced to death.

Yet although imagination gets Cincinnatus into trouble, it is essential to his survival. It is more than just hope: Cincinnatus can no more give up his imagination than he can give up breathing. One form of imagination, creative writing, seems to be the only way that Cincinnatus, all alone in the world, can discover true feelings:

I have no desires, save the desire to express myself -- in defiance of the world’s muteness. How frightened I am. How sick with fright. But no one shall take me away from myself. I am frightened -- and now I am losing some thread, which I held so palpably only a moment ago. Where is it? It has slipped out of my grasp! I am trembling over the paper, chewing the pencil through to the lead, hunching over to conceal myself from the door through which a piercing eye stings me in the nape, and it seems I am right on the verge of crumpling everything and tearing it up. I am here through an error -- not in this prison specifically -- but in this whole terrible, striped world...in my dreams the world would come alive, becoming so captivatingly majestic, free and ethereal, that afterwards it would be oppressive to breathe the dust of this painted life.

When Cincinnatus writes, he becomes effusive in a way that he never is around the jailers. He writes about his feelings from the pit of his heart, and is even moved to tears. Writing is an escape from the fortress.

Yet it seems that there is one last way that writing is crucial to Cincinnatus. It seems to be the only way he can retain his autonomy as an individual. Cincinnatus writes, trying to render himself unto paper:

...in the end the logical thing would be to give up and I would give up if I were laboring for a reader existing today, but as there is in the world not a single human who can speak my language; or more simply, not a single human who can speak; or, even more simply, not a single human; I must think only of myself, of that force which urges me to express myself…I am chained to this tale like a cup to a drinking fountain, and will not rise till I have said what I want.

Cincinnatus’s writing differs from the other writing in the country he lives in because it is not meant to be read. Cincinnatus knows that no audience will ever understand it. There is no one else like him, there is no one else to understand himself on his terms. So he keeps his journal for himself, to remember who he is and to keep the flame of consciousness alive within. To fail to write would be to succumb to the same conformity, the same anonymity, that everyone else in his world embraces.

***

It is the remarkable characterization of Cincinnatus and his jailers that, I believe, separates Invitation to a Beheading from other works with a similar message. Not only is Beheading one of the original innovators in what would become a rich and celebrated genre; it is also an exceptional portrayal of an assaulted character having his dignity slowly stripped day by day, and the futile resistance he puts up when he exercises his imagination.

Certainly, regimes can utilize conformity in many bad ways; it can be used to nefarious political ends, to entrench an upper class, to exact slave labor from a populace, to ingeniously limit freedom, to induce citizens to pursue a purely evil agenda. I believe that in Invitation to a Beheading Nabokov keys in on one of the less regarded, more personal, evils that conformity can perpetuate: it leaves those who can not, or will not, conform, alienated and without dignity.

It is this facet which expands the lessons of Invitation to a Beheading beyond the confines of a totalitarian society. Cincinnatus’s fate is a fate any of us may face, be it in the office, at family gatherings, in school, or any one of myriad other settings. Only the most easy-going of us are not forced to conform at some point in our lives, and most of us have probably already faced the dilemma that Cincinnatus battles in Invitation to a Beheading.

Unlike other non-conformists, Cincinnatus’s particular method of battle is a continuous retreat from people. Cincinnatus has potential allies -- his wife, his lawyer, the librarian -- but his lawyer and wife fail to understand him, and the librarian is too weak to help. Writing is all that is left to him. Although Cincinnatus manages a stalemate with his jailers, this no-decision it must serve as a cautionary note to us. The imagination can shore up a life of non-conformity, but unless we have an authentic friend or two to share it with, it will be a difficult life.

Comments

[Lyndel]

but what about little emmie (Nabokov specifically mentioned her in his prolouge)? what are your thoughts of her? what significance do you see in Marthes filandering and the effects it had on Cin.? I'm a student who just finished the book and enjoyed its lyrical nature, but am confused about a number of things. (well, was confused, your explanations helped...). Thanks

Hi, I'm still waiting for a reply to my question..anybody have some ideas. - Lyndel :)

[Dean Gransar]

I think little emmie should not be taken seriously. she could represent the glamour of society -- its promisses which Cincinatus falls for momentarily. Like her promis to marry him when in fact she is psychologically emature and not prepared to take responsibility not even for her words. That's what my understanding was.
You have to remember this is a city that encourages killing socrates (before the beheading they just promote the show "socrates must be decreased"!).
Marthes makes a sacrifice in order to meet cincinatus in jail that is selling her self to one of the jailors (which turns out to be many more when she is there) but she has done that many times before. Therefore I had a hard time finding value in what she did. she is another part of the whole obsurdity.

[Dean]

I think little emmie should not be taken seriously. she could represent the glamour of society -- its promisses which Cincinatus falls for momentarily. Like her promis to marry him when in fact she is psychologically emature and not prepared to take responsibility not even for her words. That's what my understanding was.
You have to remember this is a city that encourages killing socrates (before the beheading they just promote the show "socrates must be decreased"!).
Marthes makes a sacrifice in order to meet cincinatus in jail that is selling her self to one of the jailors (which turns out to be many more when she is there) but she has done that many times before. Therefore I had a hard time finding value in what she did. she is another part of the whole obsurdity.

[Matt M.]

Are you then advancing the position that the story ends with C. meeting his fate and not rising above the illusory characters? The central issue is conformity, but I tended to view the work as a treatise on the subversion of childlike emotion to the rational, superficial adult world. The transparency of the characters, the crime of being opaque, suggest that to be accepted is to purge the body of that which differentiates each person, emotions. Everyone's physiology is basically the same, but people love, mourn and grieve in unique ways. The trials that Pierre and the various jailers force C. to undergo, then are attempts to subdue his emotions that were never stifled by society. The "rescue attempt" assumes a dual role of farcical and instructive. Pierre and Rodion are attempting to subvert the emphasis on salvation. Death or life matters not, what is deemed important by society is the seizure of each moment. The refusal to illuminate C. on the day of his death serves as further teaching. The only benefit the condemned man has is "knowing when he will die," a concept wholly foreign to the others in the prison. Marthe provides the best example of his deviation from society. The cuckolding of C. by Marthe is never explicitly stated to fall outside of family norms and through her interaction with the guards, may be accepted by society. C. can never condone it, as he runs to weep in the washroom. The end treatise C. writes is his capitulation to society’s exhortations. As he steps down from the scaffold, he has become as transparent as his accusers, leaving his shunned emotions lying on the stage.

[Meghan]

What a wonderful interpretation of the book!!! Have you read Vladimir Alexandrov's interpretation of the novel, Nabokov's Otherworld?

[Dave]

I'm surprised you didn't mention Cincinatus' imaginary double, I felt that it was important motif that supports the struggle between conformity and non-conformity.

[Hans DelCrosche]

What of the spider in his cell? It almost seemed to me as if it was an interchangable charecter with cincinatus, being that as it was in its web, it was in its own perfect world. The web it had created seemed to be the only place it could safely reside

[Loretta Taylor]

I feel that an additional theme is the struggle to emerge as a writer within an alloted time (the ever shortening pencil) Emmie represents the capricous and alluring distraction of women

[Reader]

BE PROFESSIONAL: CITE PAGE NUMBERS FOR QUOTES

Otherwise, a very interesting and well thought out review. : )

Thanks much,
-The Literary World

[eric C.]

Does anyone else see the metafictional elements of the novel? The cell itself can be seen as the physical limitations of the novel. And the two personas of C. can be C. the character and C. the creator of the story in which he has placed himself. Any author tries to convey meaning to his/her readers, but it always limited by text and the futile attempts to say just what one means, without ever knowing if the reader will understand the author's meaning. Every published writer must also struggle against the publishers, the agents, the critics, and the PR firms that market books--these are the jailers that keep the writer shackled to manufactured public opinion. Reading the book within the framework of the writer trying to write (as illustrated time and again in the novel with C.'s attempts to create on an ever-diminishing pencil--sharpened by his jailer) we may be reading one of the finest works of metafiction ever created.

[A. Ross]

Do you percieve C.C.'s meditations on writing as an analogy for a broader Gnostic theme, or more directly, a metaliterary element? Kind of a biggie, likely without one straight answer, but I'd love to hear anyone's thoughts.

[Greg]

I just finished the novel for the first time recently and I, too, was trying to establish a theory on its metafictional aspects.

One scene that stood out for me was when Marthe and her family came to the cell with all of their furniture. I felt that this scene was indicative of Cincinatus (or Nabokov) feeling uncomfortable at a family gathering. When one is someplace undesirable, it can become oppressive like a jail cell, particularly if everyone around you is of a very different mindset.

I do not think that Marthe and her family actually brought all of these things to a jail cell somewhere in a fortress. I think the cell came to represent all of the various places that Cincinatus felt trapped in life. He was squeezing the world around him into a metaphorical prison.