Lolita (Penguin Modern Classics)
Amazon.com ReviewDespite its lascivious reputation, the pleasures of
Lolita are as much intellectual as erogenous. It is a love story with the power to raise both chuckles and eyebrows. Humbert Humbert is a European intellectual adrift in America, haunted by memories of a lost adolescent love. When he meets his ideal nymphet in the shape of 12-year-old Dolores Haze, he constructs an elaborate plot to seduce her, but first he must get rid of her mother. In spite of his diabolical wit, reality proves to be more slippery than Humberts feverish fantasies, and Lolita refuses to conform to his image of the perfect lover.
Playfully perverse in form as well as content, riddled with puns and literary allusions, Nabokovs 1955 novel is a hymn to the Russian-born authors delight in his adopted language. Indeed, readers who want to probe all of its allusive nooks and crannies will need to consult the Lolita is undoubtedly, brazenly erotic, but the eroticism springs less from the frail honey-hued shoulders … the silky supple bare back of little Lo than it does from the wantonly gorgeous prose that Humbert uses to recount his forbidden passion: She was musical and apple-sweet … Lola the bobby-soxer, devouring her immemorial fruit, singing through its juice … and every movement she made, every shuffle and ripple, helped me to conceal and to improve the secret system of tactile correspondence between beast and beauty–between my gagged, bursting beast and the beauty of her dimpled body in its innocent cotton frock. Much has been made of Lolita as metaphor, perhaps because the love affair at its heart is so troubling. Humbert represents the formal, educated Old World of Europe, while Lolita is America: ripening, beautiful, but not too bright and a little vulgar. Nabokov delights in exploring the intercourse between these cultures, and the passages where Humbert describes the suburbs and strip malls and motels of postwar America are filled with both attraction and repulsion, those restaurants where the holy spirit of Huncan Dines had descended upon the cute paper napkins and cottage-cheese-crested salads. Yet however tempting the novels symbolism may be, its chief delight–and power–lies in the character of Humbert Humbert. He, at least as he tells it, is no seedy skulker, no twisted destroyer of innocence. Instead, Nabokovs celebrated mouthpiece is erudite and witty, even at his most depraved. Humbert cant help it–linguistic jouissance is as important to him as the satisfaction of his arrested libido. –Simon Leake –This text refers to the Paperback edition.
Review
Ten years out of the typewriter, the masters own script, not in pettish refutation of a munificent film but purely as a vivacious variant of an old novel - a minor curiosity but undoubtedly a must have for Nabokovians. (Kirkus Reviews)
The subject matter, of a middle-aged man desiring a young girl, a nymphet of 12 at the beginning of their affair, was so outrageous that the sheer delicacy and also the wit of the writing was hardly commented on. Lolita was not, in fact, about sex - it was about love and it was about erotic emotion, not any kind of pornography. Humbert is one of the most self-aware narrators in contemporary fiction, and mocks, and derides, and lashes himself with wonderful energy. He sees himself as others see him and is merciless in attacking what he is doing to Lolita, quite clear-eyed about what she is doing to herself. This reviewer has never been able to find in any of Nabokovs other work quite the vitality, and beauty there is in this extraordinary novel. (Kirkus UK) –This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Why Buy A Lolita (Penguin Modern Classics)?
Despite its lascivious reputation, the pleasures of Lolita are as much intellectual as erogenous. It is a love story with the power to raise both chuckles and eyebrows. Humbert Humbert is a European intellectual adrift in America, haunted by memories of a lost adolescent love. When he meets his ideal nymphet in the shape of 12-year-old Dolores Haze, he constructs an elaborate plot to seduce her, but first he must get rid of her mother. In spite of his diabolical wit, reality proves to be more slippery than Humberts feverish fantasies, and Lolita refuses to conform to his image of the perfect lover.
Playfully perverse in form as well as content, riddled with puns and literary allusions, Nabokovs 1955 novel is a hymn to the Russian-born authors delight in his adopted language. Indeed, readers who want to probe all of its allusive nooks and crannies will need to consult the annotated edition. Lolita is undoubtedly, brazenly erotic, but the eroticism springs less from the frail honey-hued shoulders … the silky supple bare back of little Lo than it does from the wantonly gorgeous prose that Humbert uses to recount his forbidden passion: She was musical and apple-sweet … Lola the bobby-soxer, devouring her immemorial fruit, singing through its juice … and every movement she made, every shuffle and ripple, helped me to conceal and to improve the secret system of tactile correspondence between beast and beauty–between my gagged, bursting beast and the beauty of her dimpled body in its innocent cotton frock. Much has been made of Lolita as metaphor, perhaps because the love affair at its heart is so troubling. Humbert represents the formal, educated Old World of Europe, while Lolita is America: ripening, beautiful, but not too bright and a little vulgar. Nabokov delights in exploring the intercourse between these cultures, and the passages where Humbert describes the suburbs and strip malls and motels of postwar America are filled with both attraction and repulsion, those restaurants where the holy spirit of Huncan Dines had descended upon the cute paper napkins and cottage-cheese-crested salads. Yet however tempting the novels symbolism may be, its chief delight–and power–lies in the character of Humbert Humbert. He, at least as he tells it, is no seedy skulker, no twisted destroyer of innocence. Instead, Nabokovs celebrated mouthpiece is erudite and witty, even at his most depraved. Humbert cant help it–linguistic jouissance is as important to him as the satisfaction of his arrested libido. –Simon Leake
Customer Reviews & Opinions
Nabokovian Is Not Porn
Pardon my title, but I didn’t want this quick comment to come off as a rant. Simply stated, this is not porn, and the proof is in all these reviews–even the one-stars. No crass and pointless pornography has ever elicited such deep, intellectually profound comments. Notice how Nabokov has even inspired the writers of these reviews to imitate his style. I find almost as much enjoyment in reading the Nabokovian reviews as I do the novel. The subject matter of the novel is difficult, but instead of rejecting the whole, embrace the style. And some of you writing reviews here have the obvious skill to write your own Nabokovian fiction. Write it! Write more work in the style of Lolita. It will be compared with, and criticized for being an imitation of, but don’t let that stop you. More writers should be attempting to stand on his heroic shoulders.
revolting, moving, timeless, amazing.
imagine the most beautiful writing ever, then make it about one of the most vile person you can come up with. Lolita is so good that it makes you love a pedophile. there isnt much else i can say but go read it.
A “Second Rate Brand of English”?
In his after word at the end of this marvelous novel, Nabokov laments that he wrote the book in a “second rate brand of English” rather than in the natural idiom of his mother tongue, implying that he could have rendered the nuances of the story more fully in Russian. Being illiterate in Russian, I cannot know whether Nabokov could have written the novel even more richly in his native tongue than he did in English; however, I shall note that Nabokov’s “second rate brand of English” is far richer and more expressive and descriptive than is the brand used by the vast majority of native speakers of English. Nabokov is an absolute master of language, be it his native Russian or his second languages of English and French.
I find LOLITA to be neither the smut that some labeled it upon its publication nor the love story that the current dust jacket proclaims. Rather, it is a portrait of the mind of a pedophile, who readily admits his guilt in the eyes of “normal” society, yet who sees his attraction as transcending the censure of that society, who remains unrepentant to the end, and yet who hides behind a pseudonym, for we never know who Humbert Humbert really is. For that matter, we never know who anyone in the novel “really” is since H.H. protects everyone behind a pseudonym. Even Lolita’s “real” name of Delores Haze is revealed as pseudonymous.
A fascinating technique of the author is to have H.H. describe those with whom he interacts as H.H. himself sees them, and all except the nymphets appear round headed, bloated, misshapen, malformed, hairy, crass, and otherwise generally repulsive. H.H.’s obvious hyperbole is often quite amusing in its universal application to every other person in H.H.’s world (except, of course, for certain prepubescent girls).
Should the reader wonder whether or not Lolita’s apparent early attraction to H.H. is realistic, one need only remember that every action in the novel is described as it is perceived and interpreted by H.H. The same, of course, is true in regard to Humbert’s description of himself as roguishly handsome. If the reader only bears in mind that this story unfolds through Humbert’s vision and interpretation of events, everything becomes comprehensible and rational–at least in Humbert’s mind.
I earlier referred to this book as a portrait. To continue that metaphor a bit, Nabokov is one of the most accomplished artists in modern literature. His command of the language, his ability to make it respond to his pen, his skill in selecting words and fashioning sentences that communicate visions and thoughts and states of mind are unexcelled. It is witnessing the evocation of that skill that is to me the reward of reading LOLITA. The reader becomes awestruck at Nabokov’s creative genius with the written word and feels privileged to be in the company of such a writer.
Early in the reading, however, it became clear that I could not fully enjoy Nabokov’s creation without a little ancillary help. The remainder of the reading was accomplished with two other books readily at hand: Webster’s New World Dictionary and Larousse’s French-English Dictionary. I suppose these could be forgone if one can skip over the occasional word that is not in one’s recognition vocabulary and has no problem ignoring Humbert’s occasional French phrase. Nonetheless, understanding these accurately does add to the richness of the experience, for Nabokov includes nothing that does not contribute to the portrait he is painting for our enjoyment.
I highly recommend LOLITA to every reader who appreciates the masterful use of language to convey images from one mind to another; however, if the thought of being in the company of a pedophile is too disturbing, then begin with another Nabokov novel, PNIN, a beautiful, somewhat sad, but optimistically hopeful novel that also shows us the creativity of this wonderful painter-with-words.
One of the Best Ever Written
I don’t know what I can say about Lolita that hasn’t already been said. Hands down, it is one of the most beautifully written novels of the last 100 years. Nabokov makes each line read like poetry, especially the opening few paragraphs, which should be counted among the best in history. Even though the subject matter isn’t exactly desirable, Nabokov still creates interesting characters and situations. I’d give it more than five stars if I could.
Get Amazon’s Lowest Price Today!
Read Full Post »