Comments on: Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

By: 101 Books in 1001 Days

101 Books in 1001 Days — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 04:28:30 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov [...]

By: Enter your September/October reviews here : 1% Well-Read Challenge

Enter your September/October reviews here : 1% Well-Read Challenge — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 01:45:31 +0000

[...] Veronica (Blonde)56. Veronica (the Woman in White)57. Veronica (Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde)58. 3M (Lolita)59. 3M [...]

By: Russian Reading Challenge Complete!

Russian Reading Challenge Complete! — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:23:22 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov [...]

By: Well-Rounded Challenge Complete!

Well-Rounded Challenge Complete! — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 06:39:24 +0000

[...] Reading Challenge — Lolita by Vladimir [...]

By: Classics Challenge Complete!

Classics Challenge Complete! — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 04:20:17 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov [...]

By: Decades ‘08

Decades ‘08 — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 05:14:28 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov [...]

By: Russian Reading Challenge

Russian Reading Challenge — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:44:58 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov [...]

By: 3M

3M — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:41:23 +0000

Callie, you said “The entire point of the artform is that it can MAKE something horrendously immoral seem fine through proper presentation.”

That’s just it. This book or any other will *never* make pedophilia seem fine to me. Never.

I’m sorry I sicken you. Pedophilia sickens me.

By: Callie

Callie — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 03:35:22 +0000

Nabokov himself has said that PLOT IS NOT IMPORTANT in reading literature; it merely distracts from the art, as the reader is so fixed on “what happens next” that s/he misses the true art.

You say that his writing is “great”, so you can overlook how despicable Humbert is. That’s absolutely the wrong way of looking at it. Clearly, Humbert’s despicable nature IS the reason he wrote the book — he wants to separate aesthetics from morality, to see if beautiful prose can distract the reader from something so brutal and savage. Humbert is the ultimate unreliable narrator, which is a much-celebrated literary form. The entire point of the artform is that it can MAKE something horrendously immoral seem fine through proper presentation.

Further, the book is about searching for patterns and clues and metaphors, shadows and doubles and glimmers. The point of the book is NOT WHAT HAPPENS and you are an abysmal reader of literature to think so. It is a brilliantly crafted piece. If you think it only deserves three stars, I recommend you obtain the annotated copy so you can trace all the intricate patterns and intentional allusions throughout.

It’s hard for me to articulate HOW WRONG your approach to reading Nabokov is. I can’t believe that you think highly enough of your literary opinion to have the gall to insult him.

If you care so much about plot, you should read trashy detective novels. Plot is not the point of Nabokov’s literature.

You sicken me.

By: The cats are herded!

The cats are herded! — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:27:47 +0000

[...] Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (Rhinoa) (Day Dream Muse) (Just a Reading Fool) [...]

By: Amanda

Amanda — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:18:30 +0000

I loved Lolita. I especially loved that Nabokov took the reader along a ride where he almost seems to approve of HH’s behavior, right until mid-book, where he turns everything around and berates the reader for going along with him. I think the contrast is far greater and we see HH as a far worse character because Nabokov treats him well in the first half. He takes you into the mind of the pedaphile and says Yep, this is gross all right. Lolita’s one of the best books I’ve ever read, and of all the books by Nabokov I’ve delved into (somewhere between 5 and 10 at this point), it’s by far the best.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 13:14:20 +0000

I agree with your assessment. I did find parts of the book (the wording, etc.) to be funny, but it was hard to think of it as funny due to the subject matter.

By: 1% Well-Read Challenge

1% Well-Read Challenge — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:20:18 +0000

[...] Lolita by Nabokov [...]

By: Lori L

Lori L — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:23:23 +0000

I still just can’t bring myself to read Lolita…

By: Rhinoa

Rhinoa — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:58:44 +0000

I really adored this novel. It is beautifully written, if like you say, you can get past the storyline. It is definitely in my top 5 books of all time and I plan to read more of his writing in the future. The film version with Irons in it is beautiful as well, like you say it is his voice. Natalie POrtman was originally going to play Lo but was put off by the nudity. I haven’t seen the Kubrick version.

By: leems

leems — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:24:42 +0000

Lolita is one of the most complex, tragic, and utterly consuming novels I’ve ever read.
Maybe that has something to do with why Nabokov “felt the need” to write it.

By: Carrie's Classics

Carrie's Classics — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:54:27 +0000

I agree with you. I loved and hated Lolita at the same time. I too wanted to read more Nabokov when I’d finished this one, but I haven’t done so yet.

I think that it was so well written, that I did root for Humbert a little bit. But I also knew while I was doing it that I didn’t want to. I was also rooting for Lolita, and trying to raise her up a bit more as well.

By: Tammy

Tammy — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:27:23 +0000

I really loved what Azir Nafisi had to say about “Lolita” in “Reading Lolita in Tehran.” One of the points that she made was that Humbert’s crime (beyond the obvious) was in trying to impose his dream on a real person and the damage that resulted. I loved that and think that lots of people do that to others, they try to impose their ideas and desires on someone and refuse to see the person as they really are, or even to fully acknowledge that they are a separate being.

Completely unrelated, I’ve passed on an award to you!

By: Dawn - She Is Too Fond Of Books

Dawn - She Is Too Fond Of Books — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:25:18 +0000

I like JLS Hall’s idea of reading *Lolita* during Banned Book Week. It’s sitting on my bookcase, but I haven’t yet brought myself to read it. So many pop culture references to it (I’m thinking of the Police song and the memoir *Reading Lolita in Tehran*); I have to read it and make the connections.

By: JLS Hall

JLS Hall — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:35:18 +0000

Your review makes me remember how much I love the book. I first read “Lolita” when I was about 13 or 14, pretty close to the age of the nymphet Lolita herself. So I was old enough to understand what was going on. I loved it then and still love it now – but I remember thinking it was very funny the first time I read it. Over the years, I’ve come to see the more horrendous aspects of it, as well. Still, it’s one of the most beautifully written books in the English language. Maybe I’ll re-read it for Banned Book Week!