Lolita (Vintage International)

From the very first line the narrator of Lolita, Humbert drags the reader into his world. Due to the subject matter of this book I was initially unsure how to begin reading this. I wondered if the subject of Paedophilia would be taken as seriously in Lolita as it is today. I wondered if Nabokov was going to manipulate the reader into sympathising with a Paedophile or if the relationship between a Paedophile and a 12 year old girl was going to somehow be presented as a legitimate love story. More puzzlingly I wondered how on earth people how had read this could describe it as a page turner given the disturbing subject matter. So it was with curiosity and interpretation that I began to read Lolita and as soon as I did I couldn't put it down and I began to indeed find it a `page turner'. A simple review of Lolita is not going to give the book justice in anyway and will not demonstrate the beauty of the writing, the clever wordplay or that at points the reader has to look beyond parts of the narrative which are sometimes an illusion and try to see what the actual words are telling you. Lolita has an unreliable narrator, a VERY unreliable narrator. The way Humbert is describes Lolita anyone would imagine that the object of his affection is some long limbed goddess. But of course Lolita is not. If you or I saw Lolita walking down the street all we would see is a normal looking 12 year old girl, but as the book is told through Humbert's eyes so the reader sees Lolita as seen by him. While Humbert (because of how his Paedophile mind works) might perceive that Lolita is often a willing participant in their relationship and will sometimes narrate the story this way, the reader is left with clues as to how Lolita really feels or how certain scenarios really did play out. Not everything is quite as it seems and what you are reading did not necessarily happen in quite the way you are being told. Lolita is a difficult character to pinpoint as she is only seen through Humbert's eyes, but at various points in the narrative I felt her voice came through very strongly. When her voice does come through I saw a very unhappy girl with no where else to go. Humbert does go into detail on how he has to manipulate, lie and threaten Lolita to get her to stay with him on the crazy road trip they embark on; I was not given the impression at any point that Lolita was a willing participant in all of this. 'At the hotel we had separate rooms, but in the middle of the night she came sobbing into mine, and we made it up very gently. You see, she had absolutely nowhere else to go.' There are no `sex scenes' but the narrative surrounding these events and the odd comment from both Humbert and Lolita have given me the illusion of thinking I have read more in this regard than I actually have. 'And I catch myself thinking today that our long journey.......was no more to us than a collection of dog-eared maps, ruined tour books, old tyres, and her sobs in the night - every night, every night - the moment I feigned sleep.' I am sure many people will disagree with me but I think the point of the beautiful prose was to keep me reading and turning the pages rather then to get me to `sympathise' with Humbert. If the book had been written with a sparse realistic narrative I am sure I would have stopped reading within a couple of chapters. This is not a story of redemption. Although Humbert acknowledges at the end that he `destroyed something' in Lolita he is never really sorry. Do not read this expecting a moral tale. 'I loved you. I was a pentapod monster, but I loved you. I was despicable and brutal, and turpid, and everything, mas je t'aimais. Je t'aimais! And there were times when I knew how you felt, and it was hell to know it, my little one. Lolita girl, brave Dolly Schiller'. The above are my garbled thoughts and the parts which I think I will take away from it. It's the kind of book which demands a re-read as I am sure that many parts of it went right over my head. If I was going to criticise I would say that towards the end, the book did linger quite a bit and became drawn out.

This is the only book I have ever loved and bitterly hated at the exact same time. Vladimir Nabokov, a Russian writer born at the close of the 19th century, undoubtedly penned one of the most beautifully written English language novels of all time. Reading Lolita is like tasting the seductive dark chocolate of Knipschildt’s La Madeline au Truffe with a Balthazar bottle of 2009 Bordeaux from Chateau Margaux while watching the sun set over the Mediterranean. Your senses are utterly overloaded. His magical turn of phrase, synesthetic detail and masterful imagery work to completely capture the heart of the reader. It is bewitching. Indeed, he plays with language like a game of chess, flirting with the intricacies and complexities, weaving patterns through our minds and forcing us to entangle our own emotions within the story. Nabokov was actually an acclaimed chess composer, and Humbert Humbert, his tortured protagonist, finds some solace in the elegant game. First and foremost, Lolita is a work of art, a poignant celebration of language. Though there may be no obvious moral, as Nabokov himself insists in the afterword, the novel is so emotionally powerful because it forces us to make a connection between the romantic, primeval force of love and the dark territory of pedophilia. It is a sensuous exploration of human desire and the human heart. A masterful foreword penned by the inspired invention of Dr John Ray sets up the premise of the story by introducing it as the memoirs of the disturbed academic, Humbert Humbert, who recently died in jail. By doing this we can continue reading with the comforting knowledge that he is eventually caught. We really have two Humbert Humberts to deal with, the one living out the events and the one recounting them to us years later. This lends a reserved and thoughtful tone to the narrative, so that some of the most shocking moments are delivered so matter-of-factly they seem, well, clinical. Humbert is obsessed with his disturbing concept of “nymphets”, young girls with a certain innocence, grace and vulnerability. He even fantasizes about ruling over a sort of Lord of the Flies type island of nymphets he can presumably exploit to his heart’s content. But, ay, there’s the rub. The thing about Humbert is that he is a man of fantasies. He is not a lunatic, a criminal, or a psychopath, but a troubled academic tortured by his poetic dreams. These dreams suddenly and fortuitously come true when chance sees him become the tenant of glamorous and desperate widow, Charlotte Haze. She just happens to have a daughter . . . Lolita. Through almost no effort on his part Charlotte falls for him and they are married before you can say, “hang on a wee minute.” He now has the opportunity to get to her little girl. The most shocking moment of the novel, and one of any novel I have ever read, is when Charlotte finds his diary and discovers his secret. She rushes out the house to deliver a handful of urgent letters in such a state of hysteria and despair that she doesn’t notice the car hurtling towards her. She is killed instantly, and Humbert becomes Lolita’s guardian. The rapidity and cold delivery of this event makes it all the more frightening. This is a tragedy related in a monotone. Humbert continually references Dante’s eternal love for Beatrice in the triumph, The Divine Comedy, which began when the latter was only eight years old, younger even than Lolita, but he seems to forget that Dante was the same age as Beatrice, not three decades her senior. After their first encounter he famously wrote, “La Vita Nuova: Ecce Deus fortior me, qui veniens dominabitur mihi: Behold, a deity stronger than I; who coming, shall rule over me.” Perhaps this is the comparison, because this is precisely what happens to Humbert. Lolita is an utterly omnipotent deity in total control of his heart, the thing is, she just couldn’t care less. Even so, a more fitting comparison would be Sade’s Justine, the notorious twelve-year old pauper who is subjected to a horrific decade of sexual abuse. Written by the even more notorious Marquis de Sade, the book has been banned and censored countless times, and its author spent half his life behind bars as well as his name becoming the origin of ‘sadism’. Some legacy. After Charlotte’s death in Lolita, it is here that Humbert moves into the realm of crime, tearing the helpless and now utterly vulnerable girl from her old life and embarking on a nomadic road trip across the US as he fulfills his fantasies . . . This gives rise to some truly beautiful exploration of the American countryside, of the raw majesty of the land. It seems to contrast so poignantly with Humbert’s worshipful idolisation of his Lolita, who submits to his sexual fantasies but remains utterly unengaged emotionally. Her cold and childlike indifference, stubbornness and desire to rebel just makes it all so much more horrific. She is like a shell. And it is utterly heartbreaking. What we must remember is that he is not being driven by lust or sadism or rage or greed or any other immoral and dangerous desire, but by something even more destructive . . . love. Naturally, Lolita became notorious as soon it was published in 1959, and Nabokov was fully aware it would be, “I have to tread carefully. I have to speak in a whisper.” However, this book could hardly be further from the trashy genre of erotica or the debasing allure of pornography. No, it is a story about a man in love. The oldest most well-known story there is. Humbert is not simply a sadistic pervert, indeed he urges the reader throughout the novel to hear him out, to see beyond social convention and the sanctimonious laws of society. At one point when I was beginning to grimace in discomfort and revulsion, the episode in which he first considers fully taking advantage of Lolita, he writes, “Oh, do not scowl at me, reader.” Then comes the pleading insistence that we do not cast the book aside. It is surreal. Nabokov, as much as his complex poet-pervert creation, is reaching through the decades and speaking directly to us. It is a powerful feat of persuasion and I for one was wholly persuaded. The prose is truly beautiful. “Cold spiders of panic crawled down my back” . . . What is it about Nabokov’s writing? I have asked myself this many times and keep coming back to the elegance and grace of chess . . . Humbert’s arrival in the US is perhaps the first pawn being moved, Charlotte’s death the first check, his arrest, the final checkmate, and the opponents, well, the opponents can only be his heart and his head. Throughout the entire novel a ferocious internal battle rages within him between his insatiable desire and his cold, academic reason. Who wins? In a way, neither. Desire triumphs in the sense that he essentially kidnaps Lolita and she is utterly at his mercy, but his morality, something that he undoubtedly does possess, battles him every step of the way. The guilt, the crippling remorse, not once is his conscience at peace. The whole concept of Lolita is so horrific, so immoral, so naturally repulsive to us, it can cloud a simple truth. The truth is, this is a masterpiece. The sheer beauty of the artwork is in the details, in the small scenes and snapshots of such intensity, the very nerves of the book, each delivering a sharp spike of feeling, whether it is horror, mirth, revulsion or shock. Yes, this is the most sensuous and powerful exploration of human desire I have ever read. "I am thinking of aurochs and angels, the secret of durable pigments, prophetic sonnets, the refuge of art. And this is the only immortality you and I may share, my Lolita."

Vladimir Nabokov was one of the great writers of the 20th century; his love for wordplay, attention to detail and mastery of English prose are all the more stunning given that he is no less talented in French and Russian. All this figures heavily into Lolita, arguably his greatest novel, where knowledge of French can add yet another dimension to the experience. This is one of comparatively few books that truly engage their readers. Nabokov plays with his prose, which at times seems overly strong but matches the content perfectly. Nabokov writes the story in the same way that the protagonist experiences his world, never at face value but always drawing links to emotions, memories and ideas with wordplay, puns and flamboyant prose. Lolita is by no means a light read, neither in its style, nor in its subject matter. Its central theme of a man's infatuation with a young, seemingly manipulative girl drives this story more than its plot does. This insight into the depraved mind of Humbert Humbert is at times unsettling, although the novel never makes a show of its perversion as contemporary splatter films do. The novel is presented as if written by Humbert himself, and he is a prototype for the unreliable narrator, twisting context and events. Early on he provides us with a sort of Freudian excuse for his behavior, portraying himself as a tragic hero ruined by a love that cannot be, but as we read on we see much and more of Humbert's sick or perhaps only human mind.

I’m working my way through a great swath of classic literature and given the huge attention this book has received I thought I’d include it while I was going through the Russian novelists. As it happened though, either this novel wasn’t nearly as profound as academics seem to consider it to be, or I’m dumber than I thought I was, because I saw nothing particularly significant or profound in it. Nabokov’s command of English is precise, well embellished and pleasing to read, (impressively so, given his native Russian tongue), but I don’t feel as though I gained anything from having read Lolita. Perhaps it just doesn’t suit my incentives for reading, and that’s fine. If you read literature in an attempt to draw ideas from the texts then- as far as I can tell- this isn’t worth your time. On the other hand, if you are more emotionally malleable and enjoy immersing yourself in elaborate descriptions and ‘feeling’ your way through a narrative along with the characters, I think you’d likely get a lot more from it than I did. It ended up being a chore for me.

Returned to this after many years and found it very thought-provoking. We had it in our book club: three of us thought it was a truly great book, one thought it pretentious nonsense, one found it boring, one could not proceed beyond the first ten pages because she found paedophyllia so horrible. So, writing from the camp who found this one of the most brilliant books ever written, I will warn those who are looking for an easy read, that Nabokov is not an easy read. He is writing in his second language and therefore uses some words in an unusual way and makes up others. It is about a paedophile but not about sex, it does not describe the sexual act but is, rather, a portrait of power, control, spite and sadism. Lolita, said Nabokov, was one of the most admirable people he ever created and this comes through in the book; poor Lolita tries to cope with her abuse and her controller in as 'normal' a way as possible. Humbert Humbert is a truly horrible person but the portrait is a clever one because there are enough redeeming factors (self knowledge, a sense of irony) that make one read on rather than throwing the book away. There is a lot of symolism and symetries which I did not appreciate until I read the notes at the end of the book. I think that the overwhelming feeling was that, here is a real piece of literature, not some hastily constructed product from a creative writing course. Nabokov is truly a towering presence in the literary firmanent.

Having read the book like many after hearing about it for so long I have to say its one that leaves the reader with so many emotions you have to put it down, take some time to think before giving any kind of review. If anyone has seen the remake of the film Lolita then they will find on reading the book that the film is extremely faithful to the book. What the film doesnt reflect however, is that the book is read in the form of the main character standing trial. The book in another words begins at the end so to speak. Humbert beings by telling us (Or rather the jury) Something of historical characters who have all been adults who have been in a relationship or even married to what we would consider children, in this sense he attempts to justify his actions (Though not for me anyway with much joy) He goes on to tell us about his early childhood and upbringing and how he became infatuated with "Nymphets" Which in spite of what some who seem to be sympathetic to the character of Humbert would like us believe are what Humbert himself calls prepubescent girls. In another words, the main character admits himself his own perversion. If you know even a little of the story you will know that he soon moves in with a woman who has a young (12 year old) Daughter Lolita who is something of a problem child, her mother begins a relationship with Humbert whoes only motive is to get close to Lolita and seek his own opportunity to strike while Lolita's behaviour becomes such that she is sent away to school. Her mother finds out about Humbert's intentions and is killed running away, Humbert goes and picks up Lolita from school and basically kidnaps her where she then becomes the subject of his child molestation. (There simply are no other words for what he does) Reading this book it is quite remarkable the depth of knowledge the author has on the subject (And at times rather frightening) I dont think for one minute its simply a "Sign of the times" That we are more shocked today by this book than anyone in the past may have been as can be seen by the main characters trial. Is this book disturbing? You bet it is. When you read how he prevents her from speaking to adults as much as possible to avoid her "Giving too much away" Or when he rents a house with her and is pleased with himself because he has a view of a school yard where under age girls play and is upset when workmen block his view. Or how about how pleased he is with his neighbours who dont speak enough English to ask too many questions or ones he happily believes are paedophiles themselves? Hubert may at times regret what he is doing to Lolita but he still doesn't stop himself using. When we read today the reports of child molesters in the news you can see the exact same thing in the actions of Humbert. He hides her away, he buys her off with gifts and money, at one point in the book he becomes fearful she is saving up to run away from him so goes into her room and steals the money back to prevent her. He runs from town to town to prevent people asking too much. The character who does indeed steal her away from him we would know today as being part of a child abuse ring. Is this book shocking? yes. Can it be considered entertaining? Well I wouldn't have thought so. Is it remarkably well written? Yes.

This book is one of the most beautiful i've ever read - the prose is breathtaking - it really is a work of art. AND funny - oh yes, it really made me laugh, so clever, so witty. The Humbert character is just astonishing - he is just vile in every way!! He narrates the story too - so all we get is the world through his eyes - his perverted, sick mind - but as i said he is so funny! Its a classic, should be talked about far more - its brilliant, a work of art and honestly one of the best books i've ever read - i adored it. BUT it is a hand book for peodophiles - its utterly perverted - and yet contains no crude words, just beautiful prose. SO can i recommend it? I don't know - it depends who you are i guess? If you can read it as a truly fantastic, witty, clever book you'll love it. If you cannot take the subject matter (and it is very shocking) then no i can't recommend it, because it could and probably will upset you. But for me, it was a delight to read. Nabokov created a monster but so cleverly that even though i hate Humbert - i love the novel Lolita.

Oddly named intellectual and romantic, Humbert Humbert, falls in love with Dolores Haze, his landlady's twelve-year-old daughter. To linger in close proximity to the child, he decides to marry her mother, despite several misgivings. The partnership, naturally, does not go as planned for the hopeful lover, and Humbert begins dreaming up ways of ending the marriage by staging a drowning or some such 'accident', thereby relieving himself of the clingy housewife. However, events take an unexpected turn and Humbert embarks on an extended trip across America with his recently-acquired daughter... I feel slightly ashamed that it's taken me so long to read this book. I saw the film years ago (the Kubrick one), though don't remember much of it, but the novel is quite another matter. The writing is superb, the style so unusual and original that it was at times hard to believe Nabokov's native language wasn't English. Though the subject matter is dodgy (to say the least), the author handles it well, and the (occasional) sex scenes are suggested, rather than described. It's interesting too, that while Nabokov is obviously not writing from his own point of view, he allows his central character to retain a little dignity in his (Humbert's) acknowledgment of the facts - that he is somewhat depraved, though not a destroyer of innocence. The author's descriptions of post-war America are fascinating too, presenting sketches of a country and its culture in the midst of change. Darkly comic in style, Nabokov's wit is divine and lovingly crafted. As a novelist myself, I've rarely seen a book that impressed me more.

Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita is one of those rare novels that challenges, disturbs, and fascinates all at once. The prose is dazzling—every sentence feels crafted with precision and musicality. Nabokov’s command of language transforms an uncomfortable subject into a haunting exploration of obsession, morality, and manipulation.That said, this is not an easy read. The story’s disturbing core makes it emotionally taxing, and readers should be prepared for intense discomfort. But beyond the shock lies a novel of stunning psychological depth and literary genius. Lolita is both a portrait of human darkness and a testament to the power of art to capture the complexity of the human mind.I’d recommend it to readers interested in classic literature, moral ambiguity, and linguistic artistry—but not to those seeking light entertainment.

the size is smaller than usual book size, the cover is sticky and poorly made. pages are too thin. simply, a bad quality. go buy from another brand if you can

The cover page is so utterly soft to touch that it feels like a nymphet… I mean… uh… a soft cloud. Yeah, just like on the cover page. All joking aside, this is an excellent book and well worth reading. I didn’t expect it to be as graphic as it is sometimes. It’s not miserable, I just didn’t expect Humbert to be such a miserable creep. I felt bad for him in the end though.

this book is really well written, its written in a lyrical, romanticised sort of way. it almost makes you feel for the protagonist who is a child groomer, which btw is disgusting and i hate. Anyway the actual book itself came in pristine condition and everything seems to be in tact so far :)

You can check my profile for the review