jazzy_dave: (Default)
[personal profile] jazzy_dave
Vladimir Nabokov "Lolita" (Penguin Modern Classics)






This is more of a re-read as i once read this novel way back in the eighties. In many ways, this is still a controversial book due its subject of nymphets and pedophilia  Hence, the feeling of unease whilst reading it. 

Lolita is narrated by Humbert Humbert, a literary scholar born in 1910 in Paris, who is obsessed with what he refers to as "nymphets". This obsession with young girls appears to have been a result of his failure to consummate an affair with a childhood sweetheart, Annabel Leigh, before her premature death from typhus. Shortly before the start of World War II, Humbert leaves Paris for New York. In 1947, he moves to Ramsdale, a small New England town, to write. When the house he was promised burns down, he ends up at the door of Charlotte Haze, a widow, who has a sexually charged interpretation of taking in a lodger. As the two make their way through Mrs. Haze's tour of the house, Humbert rehearses different ways of turning her down, but then, after being led out into the garden, he spies Haze's 12-year-old daughter Dolores (variously referred to in the novel as Dolores, Dolly, Lolita, Lola, Lo, and L) sunbathing in the garden. Humbert, seeing Annabel Leigh in her, is instantly smitten with her and eagerly agrees to rent the room.

When Lolita is at summer camp, Mrs. Haze gives Humbert an ultimatum by letter that he must marry her (for she has fallen madly in love with him) or move out. He is horrified at first, but sees living with Lolita as his stepdaughter as a way to make her part of his living fantasy. Charlotte appears oblivious to Humbert's distaste for her and his lust for Lolita until she reads his diary. Horrified and humiliated, Charlotte decides to flee with her daughter, writing letters to Humbert, Lolita, and a strict boarding school for young ladies to which she apparently intends to send her daughter. Charlotte confronts Humbert when he returns home, ignoring his protests that the diary entries are just notes for a novel, and bolts from the house to post the letters. But upon crossing the street, she is struck and killed by a passing motorist. A child retrieves the letters and gives them to Humbert, who destroys them.

Humbert picks Lolita up from camp, telling her that her mother is desperately ill in a hospital, and takes her to The Enchanted Hunters, a hotel of regional repute, where he meets a strange man (later revealed to be Clare Quilty), who seems to know who he is. Humbert intends to use sleeping pills on Lolita, but they have little effect. Instead, she seduces Humbert, and he discovers that he is not her first lover, as she has had a sexual affair at summer camp. After leaving the hotel, Humbert tells the now-troublesome Lolita that her mother is dead. Alone and frightened, Lolita has no choice but to accept Humbert into her life on his terms.

Driving Lolita around the country in Charlotte's car, moving from state to state and motel to motel, Humbert bribes the girl for sexual favors; he falls genuinely in love with her, but is conscious that she is not attracted to him and shares none of his interests. Eventually, the two settle down in another New England town, Beardsley, with Humbert posing as Lolita's father and Lolita enrolled in a private girls' school where the headmistress views Humbert's possessive supervision as that of a strict, old-world European parent.

Humbert nevertheless is persuaded to allow Lolita to take part in a school theatrical club (extracting additional sexual favors from her in exchange for his permission). Ominously, the title of the play — The Hunted Enchanters — is an inversion of the name of the hotel where he first molested her. Lolita is enthusiastic about the play and is said to have impressed the playwright, who attended a rehearsal. But before opening night, she and Humbert have a ferocious argument, and she bolts from the house. Found by Humbert a few minutes later, Lolita declares that she wants to immediately leave town and resume their travels. Humbert is delighted, but increasingly guarded as they again drive westward, nagged by a feeling that they are being followed and that Lolita knows who the follower is. He is right. Clare Quilty, an acquaintance of Charlotte's, the nephew of the local dentist in Ramsdale, and the author of the play being performed at Lolita's school, is himself a pedophile and amateur pornographer. He is tailing the couple in accordance with a secret plan of escape devised with Lolita. While Humbert becomes increasingly paranoid, Lolita becomes ill and recuperates in a nearby hospital. One night, she checks out with her "uncle", who has paid the hospital bill. Humbert, still clueless about the identity of Lolita's "abductor," makes farcical and frantic attempts to find them by inspecting various motel-register aliases, which have been laced by Quilty with insults and jokes flavored with literary allusions.

During this period, Humbert has a chaotic, two-year love-affair with a petite alcoholic named Rita who, at 30, is 10 years younger than he and a passable physical substitute for Lolita. By 1952, Humbert has settled down as a scholar at a small academic institute. One day, he receives a letter from Lolita, now 17, who tells him that she is married, pregnant, and in desperate need of funds. Armed with a gun, Humbert, still driving Charlotte's car, visits his young obsession and gives her the money she was due from her mother's estate. He also asks her to leave with him, but she refuses. During their conversation, Lolita explains that her husband, a nearly deaf war-veteran and the father of her unborn child, was not her abductor, whereupon Humbert offers to give her all the money he has if she will reveal the man's identity. Lolita complies, saying that she had really loved Clare Quilty, but that he threw her out after she refused to perform in a pornographic film he was making.

Leaving Lolita forever, Humbert surprises Quilty at his mansion. Quilty goes mad when he sees Humbert's gun. After a mutually exhausting struggle for it, Quilty, now insane with fear, merely responds politely as Humbert repeatedly shoots him. He finally dies with a comical lack of interest, expressing his slight concern in an affected English accent. Humbert is left exhausted and disoriented. Arrested for murder, he writes the book he entitles Lolita or, The Confessions of a White Widowed Male, while awaiting trial. According to the novel's fictional "Foreword", Humbert dies of coronary thrombosis upon finishing his manuscript. Lolita dies, during childbirth, on Christmas Day, 1952.

Date: 2016-03-29 04:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spikesgirl58.livejournal.com
Well, that's a toe tapper of a novel.
Edited Date: 2016-03-29 04:48 pm (UTC)

Date: 2016-03-29 07:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
It still is controversial but the prose is exquisite.

Date: 2016-03-29 09:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spikesgirl58.livejournal.com
I can only imagine. I think I'll pass, though.

Date: 2016-03-29 10:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
Yep, twice is enough.

Date: 2016-03-29 06:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lisa-thecat.livejournal.com
The movie with Jeremy Irons is better than the book. I've first seen the movie and read the book much later. I was disappointed. And a bit disgusted. A great actor can make a disgusting character fascinating, I guess.

Date: 2016-03-29 10:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
I remember an old black and white version of it with James Mason as HH - released in 1962

Date: 2016-03-29 06:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ron-broxted.livejournal.com
Sigh. Humbert is an ephebophile.

Date: 2016-03-29 10:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] baron-waste.livejournal.com

No one EVER makes that distinction.  [In fact, it was a friend here on Livejournal who acquainted me with that term some years ago.  I'd never heard it.]

Date: 2016-03-30 09:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ron-broxted.livejournal.com
With the prominence of the Adam Johnson case it is now mot de jour;)

Date: 2016-03-29 06:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com
Hmph. Sounds like a fantasy book gone wild where the author then feels bad and kills everyone off. How convenient Lolita had already had sexual relations. After all, pedophila is so much easier when the mark seduces YOU. UGH.

Rather glad I skipped this novel. Big pile of 'whut?!' and trying to be apologetic-but-not-really sexual reuminations on under-age girls.

Date: 2016-03-29 07:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] halfshellvenus.livejournal.com
How convenient Lolita had already had sexual relations.
Exactly! And that she seduces Humbert, for no apparent reason, before he can dose her with pills and rape her.

I couldn't bring myself to ever read this-- just on the surface, it seems like an apologist trying to render unspeakable attraction as acceptable, by providing a context in which it is "not as bad as any regular person would assume."

Dave's summary of it was very good, though, and it seems to capture all of those angles.

Dave, how did you feel about the prose style? I tried to read a different Nabokov novel back around age 12 or so (it was in my parents' collection, probably a book-of-the-month offering), and was mainly struck by what seemed to be an experiment to construct the longest single sentence ever-- 1 1/2 pages! Which did not make the book any more interesting and certainly less readable.

I'm sure I didn't have much of a feel for prose style back then, but I loved the Nero Wolfe novels enough to read them at 11 or 12, and just looked up another favorite of my childhood: "The Fog Comes" (Mary Collins).

Date: 2016-03-29 07:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com
That's what got me. Like the author went 'oops' back tracked and said 'oh, well, they didn't affect her but she tried to get it on with him anyway' like it is all okay that this girl is virtually at the mercy of this man, sadly seems to know what he wants from her (which speaks of trauma to me on many levels) and knows there is no way out of it. Doesn't make him any less a rapist or her any less a victim in my eyes.

Gosh, yes. I write some...pretty awful stuff. But I would not stoop to this kind of apologetic, asinine, twisted nonsense. At least all of my characters darn well know what is going on and I make no bones about calling it what it is. And I never bring CHILDREN into the mix. UGH.

Dave did a damned good job here. Hell, technically, I've read the book - without ever having to flick a page (so that is one classic down :D)

BTW - hi! Long time no see!

*HUGS*

Date: 2016-03-29 07:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
This is my second reading of the text and i must admit it is still an uncomfortable read, biu then when i think about when it is was first published, the sexual moral of both Russia and the USA, , as well of us, was different then and that with what we have learnt since from the Jimmy Saville case and others, it was quite rampant bit of course totally immoral. We see it now with modern PC eyes but history teaches us to understand a culture we must step away from our current moral compass to deconstruct the past.

Date: 2016-03-29 08:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com
Very true. But culture at that time was already shifting. Pedophila didn't really have a name, but children (or teens) had stopped marrying early at that time (50 years time and longevity of humans being extended had pretty much put paid to that) and it was not ever really acceptable or comfortable for a male that much older to be pursuing such a young girl. 16, 17? Yes. Anything under that age was already being frowned on, which was a lot of what made this novel so controversial.

I guess it is the tone that gets me here. The author seemed to know it was..unwelcome, if not wrong. And considering it has become the champion novel of the future pedophile, it almost makes me wonder if he could see the future on this. I have no problem with putting aside my era's enlightment and seeing through the eyes of the day (a rare trait, I know - but I can watch 60's Who without being put off by the blatant sexism in it), but it seems that even in the novel's time, this was unacceptable - but a subject the 'enlightened' of the day hesitated to approach.

Date: 2016-03-29 08:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
I must admit i had to read it again to see if my feelings about this book had changed and hearing and reading what i know now , it is one book that will be consigned to the dustbin of history. Prose is one thing but the story itself is disturbing to say the least and despite everything we now know , i ask myself why did he write such a book other than to cause such controversy. Seems to be a lop out and now i feel i must read another by him to check whether this was a one or something else that stains hos output.

You are so right about the rampant sexism of the times and yet i wonder f we have moved on much at all with such detestable people as Trump et all.

Date: 2016-03-29 08:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com
I heard the prose was marvelous, but considering how 'non sensational' (or interesting at the time) his other books were, I must say, I think he did this for attention. and boy did he get it! REALLY don't approve if that is the case - but in my mind, he properly outed himself. too bad this is considered a 'classic'. But then, there are quite a few classics (from what I understand) that really don't deserve the title!

Gahhhh, I know what you mean. We like to think we're enlightened, but I guess we have just stagnated. UGH.

Date: 2016-03-29 07:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] halfshellvenus.livejournal.com
I know-- it's been awhile! *hugs back*

Date: 2016-03-29 08:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com
Hope you have been well, dear! I've seen you around. Sorry I haven't had time to say hello. Time is not a friend of late, lol!

Still - good to see you! :D

Date: 2016-03-29 07:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
I do find Nabokov's prose quite entrancing in this novel, and it is the only one i have read of his ,and thus cannot compare it with the one you mentioned, or others by him. It's a credit to him that he's built this story in such a way that it holds readers, and paints the characters in such a way that they're not only believable, but somewhat sympathetic and understandable in a sort of grotesque fashion. It is partly literature, partly philosophy (those Sartre references, those reflections on love and fate!) , partly satire and also tragedy, and a slight whiff of pornography. Perhaps all of these but it is also beautifully composed with subtle and nuanced character studies.Yes, it is disturbing but as much as Clockwork Orange was. Perhaps sometimes we need the dark to make the light better.
Edited Date: 2016-03-29 07:46 pm (UTC)

Date: 2016-03-29 08:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] calico-pye.livejournal.com
Definitely a grotesque, sympathetic character. Nabokov was an excelent wordsmith who brought the poetic Humbert Humbert to life. However, Naokov proved that keeping Dolores as his 'false child' muse was a convenient foil. To hid Dolores and consider his dilemma 'artistic', gave Humbert an excuse to contunually abuse her. All of this is inside H2's head. There is proof that, despite all her adolescent fooling around with guys from her own age group - Dolores was still a virgin until that night with Humbert in the motel.

Date: 2016-03-29 08:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
I do find Nabokov's prose quite entrancing in this novel, and it is the only one i have read of his ,and thus cannot compare it with the one you mentioned, or others by him. It's a credit to him that he's built this story in such a way that it holds readers, and paints the characters in such a way that they're not only believable, but somewhat sympathetic and understandable in a sort of grotesque fashion. It is partly literature, party philosophy (those Sartre references, those reflections on love and fate!) , partly satire and also tragedy, and a slight whiff of pornography. Perhaps all of these but it is also beautifully composed with subtle and nuanced character studies.

Date: 2016-03-29 08:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ba1126.livejournal.com
This came out about the time I was in high school and was one that everybody talked about but few admitted to reading. All I really knew about it (never read it) was that Lolita was underage and 'flirty', or in the parlance of my teenage years, "asking for it".

Date: 2016-03-29 08:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davesmusictank.livejournal.com
And that too - "asking for it" - is a loaded question.

Date: 2016-03-30 12:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] thespian15.livejournal.com
WOWZA, talk about a messed up group of people. :o
Hugs, Jon

Date: 2016-03-30 09:19 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kabuldur.livejournal.com
I never could understand what all the fuss was with this book.

Profile

jazzy_dave: (Default)
jazzy_dave

July 2025

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 19th, 2025 11:31 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios