If you’ve ever stared at an old pencil until the wood grain started to look like a topographic map of a forgotten empire, you’re halfway to understanding Vladimir Nabokov Transparent Things. Most people know Nabokov for the lush, scandalous prose of Lolita or the massive, dizzying puzzles of Ada. But this slim 1972 novella? It’s different. It’s shorter, weirder, and honestly, a lot more haunting than the big hits.
It’s basically a ghost story told by the ghosts themselves.
What Really Happens in the Story?
The plot follows Hugh Person. Yes, his name is "You Person." Nabokov wasn’t exactly being subtle about the fact that this guy represents a sort of everyman, albeit a spectacularly clumsy and doomed one. Hugh is an editor who makes four separate trips to Switzerland over two decades.
Each trip is a disaster in a new and exciting way.
- Trip One: He’s a young man with his father. His dad dies in a dressing room while trying on trousers.
- Trip Two: He’s there to meet a famous, grumpy novelist named Baron R. (who is basically a parody of Nabokov himself). He meets Armande, the woman who becomes his wife.
- Trip Three: He’s back with Armande. It’s a miserable honeymoon.
- Trip Four: Hugh returns years later, after spending time in prison and psychiatric wards. Why? Because he strangled Armande in his sleep.
The book ends with a hotel fire. It’s grim. It’s funny. It’s deeply uncomfortable. But the "plot" isn't why people still argue about this book in 2026.
🔗 Read more: The Reality of Sex Movies From Africa: Censorship, Nollywood, and the Digital Underground
The Ghostly Narrators: Who is "We"?
One of the biggest things people get wrong about Vladimir Nabokov Transparent Things is assuming Hugh is the one telling the story. He isn't. The book is narrated by a collective "we"—spirits or ghosts who have moved beyond the "thin veneer" of the present.
These ghosts see through everything.
When they look at a wooden table, they don't just see a table. They see the rings of the tree, the axe that cut it, the sweat of the carpenter, and the molecules of the varnish. They "sink" into objects. It’s a terrifying way to exist because there is no "now" for them. Everything is a transparent window into the past.
Nabokov is playing with the idea that "reality" is just a film we’ve agreed to look at. If you look too hard, you fall through.
💡 You might also like: Alfonso Cuarón: Why the Harry Potter 3 Director Changed the Wizarding World Forever
Why the Pencil Scene is Famous
There’s a legendary passage about a pencil. Hugh finds one in a drawer. Most writers would just say "he found a pencil." Not Nabokov. He spends pages tracing that pencil back to the graphite mines and the specific tree in a specific forest.
It's sort of a warning.
If we saw the full history of every "transparent thing" we touched, we’d go insane. We need the surface. We need the "veneer" to stay sane. Hugh’s problem is that he’s too "heavy" for this world; he’s a "somnambulist" who can't stay on the surface of his own life.
Is This Nabokov’s Worst Book or a Late Masterpiece?
When it came out in '72, critics were baffled. Some called it a "mock replica" of his better work. Others hated the uncomfortable "nymphet" references—there’s a bit where Hugh looks at photos of a young Armande that feels very much like Nabokov retreading Lolita territory in a way that feels unnecessary.
📖 Related: Why the Cast of Hold Your Breath 2024 Makes This Dust Bowl Horror Actually Work
But honestly? It’s probably his most honest book about death.
He was 73 when he wrote it. He was living in the Montreux Palace Hotel in Switzerland, much like the settings in the book. He was thinking about what comes next. The "ghosts" in the novel are actually quite compassionate toward poor, bumbling Hugh. They try to guide him. They try to explain how to "skim" over the surface of matter so he doesn't drown in the past.
It’s not a "decline" in power. It’s a shift in focus.
Actionable Insights for Reading (or Re-reading)
If you’re going to tackle Vladimir Nabokov Transparent Things, don't read it for the romance. There isn't any. Armande is cold and mean; Hugh is a mess.
- Read it twice. The first time, you’ll be confused by the shifts in time. The second time, you’ll realize the narrator is dropping clues about the ending on page one.
- Focus on the objects. Every time an object is described in weird detail (the pencil, the "ignoble lavatory" door, the trousers), pay attention. Those are the moments where the "transparent" nature of reality is breaking down.
- Don't look for a hero. Hugh is a murderer. Baron R. is an egomaniac. Nabokov isn't asking you to like them. He's asking you to observe them through the eyes of someone who is already dead.
Essentially, the book is a meditation on how we perceive time. We think we’re moving forward, but Nabokov suggests we’re actually just sinking. The things around us aren't solid; they’re just layers of history waiting for us to fall through them.
Next time you pick up a mundane object, try to see the "transparent" side of it. Just don't sink too deep.