Scan barcode
A review by connell98
Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
5.0
After being disgusted with how lackluster the last few books I've read were, I was recommended to read "Lolita". I have always told myself that a book that aims to terrorize but falsely does so is not well-crafted enough. "Lolita" most certainly terrorizes its readers.
Now, as many other readers of "Lolita" have had to do before, I think it is important to recognize that the appreciation of a work does not mean that a reader completely agrees with the content of the book, nonetheless even a part of it. If we had to agree with every single book we read, I don't think we would have any books that truly apply to us.
As I noted to the friend who suggested this to me, "Lolita" is disgustingly well-written. It is like a car accident that you can't take your eyes off of or an unsolved mystery that has dozens upon dozens of documentaries made of it. I knew it was unnerving from the very beginning, but I needed to know how disturbing Humbert Humbert was; I knew it, and yet I needed to know more about the depths of his rational.
(Spoilers)
At the end of the book, Nabokov leaves a note about the text (I am not sure if this is in every version or not) that says, " ... Lolita has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only insofar as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss" (315). The book deals with a horrible concept in such a beautiful way that the reader is disgusted with themselves. In the end, how can any of us enjoy the craft of a book that is about a perverted man that is never truly punished? Or a girl that dies without truly having lived life? Or the other horrible elements referenced throughout to child prostitutes or kidnapping?
To answer that, in some subpar way, I quote Nabokov again, "But after all we are not children, not illiterate juvenile delinquents, not English public school boys who after a night of homosexual romps have to endure the paradox of reading the Ancients in expurgated versions" (316). Sadly, many elements of this books are part of everyday life. We want to shun such things because we don't can't to admit that things like this happen, whether in 1955 or 2022.
In the end, "'Lolita' should make all of us -parents, social workers, educators- apply ourselves with still greater vigilance and vision to the task of bringing up a better generation in a safer world" (6).
Now, as many other readers of "Lolita" have had to do before, I think it is important to recognize that the appreciation of a work does not mean that a reader completely agrees with the content of the book, nonetheless even a part of it. If we had to agree with every single book we read, I don't think we would have any books that truly apply to us.
As I noted to the friend who suggested this to me, "Lolita" is disgustingly well-written. It is like a car accident that you can't take your eyes off of or an unsolved mystery that has dozens upon dozens of documentaries made of it. I knew it was unnerving from the very beginning, but I needed to know how disturbing Humbert Humbert was; I knew it, and yet I needed to know more about the depths of his rational.
(Spoilers)
At the end of the book, Nabokov leaves a note about the text (I am not sure if this is in every version or not) that says, " ... Lolita has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only insofar as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss" (315). The book deals with a horrible concept in such a beautiful way that the reader is disgusted with themselves. In the end, how can any of us enjoy the craft of a book that is about a perverted man that is never truly punished? Or a girl that dies without truly having lived life? Or the other horrible elements referenced throughout to child prostitutes or kidnapping?
To answer that, in some subpar way, I quote Nabokov again, "But after all we are not children, not illiterate juvenile delinquents, not English public school boys who after a night of homosexual romps have to endure the paradox of reading the Ancients in expurgated versions" (316). Sadly, many elements of this books are part of everyday life. We want to shun such things because we don't can't to admit that things like this happen, whether in 1955 or 2022.
In the end, "'Lolita' should make all of us -parents, social workers, educators- apply ourselves with still greater vigilance and vision to the task of bringing up a better generation in a safer world" (6).