Paul Benedict Grant’s The Humour of Vladimir Nabokov examines how humor functions in Vladimir Nabokov’s works as both a stylistic device and a means of philosophical and socio-political engagement. Across six chapters, Grant explores various forms of humor—comic, satirical, ironic, and absurd—arguing that humor plays a central role in Nabokov’s literary vision. Through detailed analysis and theoretical grounding, he builds a strong case for the importance of humor in Nabokov’s art.

In the introduction, Grant engages with key theories of humor, including incongruity, superiority, and relief. He highlights how Nabokov’s humor, often misunderstood due to its complexity, blends both high and low forms of comedy. This thematic overview lays the foundation for the subsequent chapters, each focusing on a distinct aspect of Nabokov’s humor. The first chapter explores the relationship between life and art in Nabokov’s creative process, emphasizing how humor served both as a coping mechanism and an artistic tool. Nabokov’s humor, shaped by his experiences of exile and mortality, is further examined in Ch. 3, which analyzes the tension between body and mind in his characters. These figures, striving for transcendence, often confront the absurdities of physical existence, underscoring the existential dimension of Nabokov’s humor. Chapter 2 addresses Nabokov’s blending of highbrow and lowbrow humor and its impact on his critical reception. Critics have accused Nabokov of intellectual elitism, but Grant contends that his juxtaposition of wit and farce in works like Pnin and Pale Fire invites broader engagement, reflecting Nabokov’s belief in art’s dual capacity to entertain and provoke thought. In Ch. 4, Grant examines Nabokov’s use of sexual humor, maintaining that characters who intellectualize or control their desires are often mocked through grotesque or comic reversals, exposing the folly of solipsism. This chapter highlights Nabokov’s acute awareness of human vulnerability and self-deception. Chapter 5 focuses on Nabokov’s satirical portrayal of political tyranny, particularly in Invitation to a Beheading and Bend Sinister. Here, totalitarian figures are depicted as theatrical absurdities, with humor operating as both a critique of and resistance to oppressive regimes. Grant situates this analysis within broader discussions on humor as a tool for subversion. The final chapter reflects on Nabokov’s view of humor as a redemptive force, helping readers confront life’s tragic absurdities with grace. Grant argues that Nabokov’s humor transcends mere playfulness, offering both aesthetic pleasure and existential reflection.

Grant’s work is comprehensive, providing detailed examinations of Nabokov’s major novels, including Invitation to a Beheading, Pnin, and Pale Fire. His analysis is deeply grounded in humor theory, drawing on concepts developed by Henri Bergson, Mikhail Bakhtin, John Morreall, and others. By linking Nabokov’s humor to themes such as mortality and tyranny, Grant provides interdisciplinary insights that enhance the book’s intellectual appeal. His close readings of Nabokov’s texts are another highlight, as he skillfully interprets key scenes and narrative strategies.

However, the book could benefit from greater focus on reader reception. For example, did readers find Nabokov’s works as funny as those of Arkady Averchenko or Sasha Chorny, whom Nabokov admired? Although Grant references Soviet satirists like Mikhail Zoshchenko and Ilʹia Ilf and Evgenii Petrov, he does not fully develop these comparative insights. Exploring how humor was perceived across different contexts could have added valuable depth. Grant also relies heavily on canonical works, with minimal analysis of Nabokov’s early Russian-language texts, poetry, and short stories. A broader selection could provide a fuller picture of Nabokov’s evolving comic sensibility. Additionally, some readers may find the theoretical sections overly dense. While they enhance academic rigor, these sections could deter those more interested in literary analysis. Grant also misses opportunities to engage with counterarguments, such as critiques of Nabokov’s humor as elitist or inaccessible. Finally, Grant introduces unclear parallels in places. In my view, a lengthy quote from Raymond Carver’s short story (147) and a reference to When Harry Met Sally (151) seem tangential to Nabokov’s comic style. On the other hand, some political asides—such as a comment on “clownish political figures” (218)—reveal Grant’s own wit and add a playful tone to the analysis.

Despite these minor shortcomings, The Humour of Vladimir Nabokov is a significant contribution to Nabokov scholarship and literary humor studies. Its detailed analysis, theoretical grounding, and interdisciplinary approach offer meaningful insights into how humor shapes Nabokov’s artistic vision. While further exploration of reader reception, a wider range of texts, and counterarguments would strengthen the book, it succeeds in illuminating the complex interplay between comedy, tragedy, and human experience in Nabokov’s fiction.