My favourite book of ALL time - Rated 
This is by far my most favourite book in the world ever! Words cannot describe how much I adore this book. It is true the subject matter is uncomfortable to think about especially today. Considering that English is not Nabokov's first language he writes it so beautifully that almost every page has a line which really sounds lyrical, rythmic and just plainly beautiful.
The book pulls your moral thoughts all over the place. The question; who takes advantage of who? is one which I always come back to, and like to ask the people who read it.
I have read this book about four times which I almost never do and I recommend it to everyone I read. It is, I suppose, an example of how something can be beautiful and wrong at the same time. It is also ultimately a book about love. Unrequited love, forbidden love, consuming love, manipulative love. There are so many aspects to love explored in this book.
Superlative - Rated
Where to begin? One of the most moving novels in the English language - rich, lyrical, intelligent, and eloquent beyond belief. Not for fans of Raymond Carver.
A trip of three on the teeth: Lo. Lee. Ta. - Rated
Without a doubt, one of the best books I've ever read. It's warm and funny and scary and confusing and (at times) an outright assault on everything polite society brought you up to expect. I liked it so much that the second I finished Lolita, I started right back at the beginning. I was excited... really excited (ok, maybe excited is a poorly chosen word in this case) about what I'd just read, still, I didn't want to hastily declare it one of my favorite novels. So I went back... read it again... re-read my notes and highlighted text, and added even more notes and highlights.
Here are a few random thoughts:
* It seems to be predominately women who love Lolita. I'm thinking this is half because women, by nature, are more likely to romanticize the situation and overlook the pedophiliac angle... and because I imagine very few men are comfortable in any way identifying with the subject matter.
* I agree 100% that Humbert loved Lolita, but I balk at some of the reviews claiming this to be the best love story ever written. Unrequited love? Sure. But reciprocal, healthy and mutual love... what are these people smoking??
* I find it fascinating that a small but vocal faction of women who loved the book feel the need to vilify Lolita (Dolly... Delores... Carmencita) for her cruelty to Humbert. It's almost as if - in order to love & approve of Humbert, Lolita must be the persecutor and not the victim. No consideration is given to the possibility that Lolita's circumstances formed her as a person.
* Nabokov is an extremely gifted writer. His long, complicated sentences unfold like exotic hothouse flowers. And kudos to him for taking no prisoners in the telling of a difficult tale. I mean, it took balls to write a story like this. He had to anticipate the backlash. Still, he didn't shy away or give his readers an easy out - a good reason to forgive Humbert. Yet they still did/do. That alone I admire beyond belief.
I honestly didn't feel like Nabokov glorified or sensationalized the subject of pedophilia. He just told a story and told it extremely well. I can appreciate it the same way I appreciate ultra-violent films or novels like A Clockwork Orange: they're all stories that remind us of the fine line between humanity and brutality.
The sexual aspect of Lolita is 100% repugnant, no denying that. And if Nabokov had soft-peddled that part one iota, I'd be pulling up a soapbox decrying the whole thing. Instead what he did was enable the reader to imagine... really imagine... what must go on in the head of a pedophile. He also shows us how these monsters can be (and often are) the school teachers, guidance counselors, Scout leaders, coaches and pastors. They're not all scary, toothless guys in trenchcoats offering candy to babies in parks. If nothing else, Nabokov shows us this with gusto.
Is it ugly, vulgar at times, and uncomfortable? You bet, and it should be. I'd question it if it were any other way. But it's also beautifully written and something that will stick with you long after you've finished the final page. And that's ok, too. It's possible (though extremely rare) to have both coexist in a kind of uncomfortable harmony... and, credit where it's due, Nabokov, I felt, walked that line better than just about anything else I've ever had the pleasure of reading.
Among the Greatest Novels I Have Ever Read... - Rated
I can barely find words to describe this book. It is simply an accomplishment of such enthralling, enigmatic, dangerous beauty that you wonder where it came from. Humbert Humbert is one of the great heroes of literacy, for me: he never slips into cliche and Nabokov gives us no easy answers. There are no good characters, just fatally flawed, doomed, and incredibly multilayered characters. Who is the victim? Who has the moral high ground? Who is right? The easy answers to these questions are probably, "Nobody", but Nabokov makes us think, via the spoiled yet damaged Dolores "Lolita" Haze, the narrow, unreliable viewpoint of Humbet Humbert, the poor, doomed Charlotte Haze and the various other characters that drop in and out of their lives so poignantly and tragically. The confessions of a dangerous mind has given us one of the best books ever written, in any language, of any genre.
Intellectual paedophilia - Rated 
Lolita is a book of literary intelligence, style and wit. Vladimir Nabokov has always been able to write and write well that is not in dispute.
Lolita is more about what readers take away from the writing than what was intended or not intended from the text or the author.
During the 1950's many books were censored and banned. Lolita was not one of them (The book `Wicked Angels' by Eric Jourdan has only recently been allowed to be published in France. A book that actually pales Nabokov's 'Lolita' to a poor read indeed). Nobokov's protagonist in 'Lolita' Humbert Humbert delves into a paedophilic view of life and his relationship with a 12 year old child. Interestingly this book was deemed more acceptable in the past by the censors than an adult relationship between two men.
This brings into perspective the book and the controversy `now' surrounding it.
You could read this book and take away from it exactly, what those who heap criticism on it state. Glorification of paedophilia. Understanding and sympathy for the paedophile. Humbert the paedophile did not have to drug `Lolita' as planned when he took her prisoner. The 12 year old child was more than complicit in her own abuse. To confirm this fact you do not have to look any further that the reviews of the book here. They also suggest a 'Love' story.
Open-minded as I am I find this a difficult pill to swallow. Humbert who threatens 'Lolita' to a home if she does not comply. Offers financial rewards for her compliance. Uses her as a pretext to invite other children to his home. His plans to impregnate the rapidly aging 'Lolita' at 13 (The Paedophile in this book has an attraction for 'nymphets' girls aged 9 to 14 only) to produce a nymphet with his blood in her veins for future exploitation.
A love story is not outside the realms of possibility but certainly not with Nobokov's Humbert and 'Lolita'. 'Embrace' by Mark Behr is a case in point. The child narrator in this book instigates and pursues single-mindedly the choirmaster at the school with a mixture of lust and revenge. The child succeeds then subsequently betrays and falls in love with him. It is difficult not to feel some sort of sympathy with the choirmaster. The narrator decades later will probably feel the terrible self righteousness of staff at the school more damaging than the actual relationship with the paedophile. The child protagonist in 'Embrace' has equal if not more power over Mr Cilliars the choirmaster with his life, liberty and livelihood.
Other people have pointed out that this book does not encourage paedophilia but merely brings into perspective the mind of the paedophile and `Lolita' is just a projection of his lust and not really a separate person in her own right. Added to this the `bad' paedophile is not really a separate entity but an extension of Humbert himself.
This book is hugely powerful and influential after all it brought to us the creepy man on playground benches before we knew who the creepy man was. It has also brought us 'Lolita' a name synonymous with paedophilia (Most child pornography was referred to by this name until recently)
This is an interesting if not disturbing book. Not so much a study of a paedophiles mind but an insight into our own social mores and understanding of the issues presented.
|
