As the protagonist seduces the child, so, too, he seduces the reader. Your review, while not making that point explicitly, makes that implicitly clear. Such is Nabokov's genius.
@@lisemagdalen he's bery intelligent too, that kind of intelligence psychopaths have, the power to convince others and manipulate them, so you will feel bad for him and think it is just normal what he did
Well you cannot seduce a child. You can rape a child. But a child cannot consent. The character of Dolores is also based on a true life 11 year old girl who was kidnapped and abused shortly before it was written. While beautifully written, I do not feel that discussion goes far enough into how disturbing it is
@szs voc to be fair, the story features an unreliable narrator who constantly tricks you into feeling sympathy for him, and distracts you from thinking about what's really happening up until the end
those who haven't read "lolita" due to its dark subject matter are totally missing out on the genius of its writing...this is the one that, for my money, qualifies under the rhapsodic rhetoric "how could a human mind do this?"...
@ThatOneAsianBroChick Just wanted to know, is there any similarity with movie Lolita 1997 and the book? I mean i found something else in the movie. Like the girl was also there who use to do that with her father for hiding or demanding something. I mean the nature of lolita in the movie was not good though. She like to make scene with various man as she describe herself in the movie.
@@rafirehad7462 Lolita is not responsible or to be blamed for anything that happened to her. The narrator of the story in the book is unreliable, which is not a commonly used literary device but it means you cannot trust his point of view on anything. So what you are told about her, is what he thinks about her, and it's unreliable
@@Gilliebeany Brother My question was so simple. Is that how lolita in the book as shown in the movie. Look, I'm talking base on the movie ok, as her father had a bad eye on Lolita. And lolita also did some cheap move with her father. If you have seen the movie then let me remind you of the car scene, while her father went to take her from camp. There I can find a lot of scenes where her father did not interest to do anything but she wanted to do that cause she needed something from him. I'm not telling that all the blame goes to lolita but she didn't seem very good girl in the movie. I just want to know, Is that how, lolita behaves in the book?
@@rafirehad7462 no. I answered your question the first time and if you can't read deeper into the movie than that to see that's not what she actually did, it's what he thinks in order to justify it, I can't help you
yeees omw the thing you said about sympathizing with humbert is the best. thats the whole point of the book; the dangers of the halo effect (if you dont know what that is, its unconscious bias we have where we think a person is good just because they’re attractive, smart, etc. even if theyre a monster) because humbert is very intelligent and charming, the reader ends up changing their opinion on him, sympathizing with him, the monster. its a genius book, but people tend to actually believe he’s a good person and end up romanticizing humbert and dolores’ toxic relationship
I love this book so much, particularly because of how it manipulated me and played with my emotions. I never thought I would be sympathizing with a pedophile, and then this book happened to me.
Perhaps you've haven't experienced a weird old guy watching your every move from 10 yo to 11 yo? My father would certainly have beaten the crap out of him but I was afraid of the power a teacher had over us. Despite the book being "beautifully written" it's still too painful to delve into a creeps mind whether he can write well or not. Perhaps a Nazi has written a piece that is well crafted yet the horrors of the Nazi regime deter us from having any sympathy or love of what is essentially abuse of other human beings? In Nabokov's work we see the victimization of a child - having been there it's too awful for words no matter how well crafted or devised the book may be. It's the subject matter specifically - amazed the book was allowed circulation when Lady Chatterly was banned.
Fantastic novel. Nabokov uses works like an artist uses a brush to create masterpiece. If you liked Lolita you will probably like Nabokov's "The Enchanter." A story he wrote in 1939 but was published after his death. It is the prototype from which Lolita took shape.
I completely agree, this book was beautifully written and it was so easy to find yourself sympathizing with him, and only when I would put the book down did I realize how horrible that was. I definitely need to reread this in the future, I feel like there was so much I missed. I have Laughter In the Dark on my shelves and really can't wait to read that and more of Nabokov. He is excellent.
Quite apart from the immorality of pedophilia, I think the sympathy with Humbert comes from our common understanding of the agony of unrequited love. It’s one layer of the multi-level cake that is this magnificent, heart-wrenching novel.
MILD SPOILERS AHEAD I adore Nabokov and "Lolita." I took a course last semester on his works and I remember discussing at one point how either Nabokov himself or Nabokovian scholars (I forget which) have said that "Lolita" is his love letter to the English language and to America in general. I definitely can see that idea in the beautifully crafted language throughout the book. He writes English in a way that only a non-native speaker could. It's like an outsider's view of the beauty to be found in the sounds and odd connections between words you would not notice or take for granted as a native speaker. His synethesia has a lot to do with his writing as well (which comes out in all of his works, or at least the ones I've read). I think that America is a huge character in the novel as well as a beautiful setting--cross-country road trips, small town USA living, roadside motels, Lolita's obsession with Hollywood starlets, Humbert's narration style which sometimes airs on the side of film noir (especially when talking about himself as this lone, misunderstood antihero archetype). In a lot of ways it's truly an American tale of an Old World immigrant clashing with this New World lifestyle. I remember in one interview Nabokov said that he didn't want any issues of "Lolita" to be published with the picture of a girl on the cover; he wanted a picture of the open road and the American countryside. Unfortunately it's nearly impossible these days to find a copy of the book without a nymphet gracing the cover. Another thing I loved about this book and Nabokov's work in general is that you can see his writing as a study on human cruelty, specifically on how human beings can lose their touch on reality in the search for beauty and end up casually committing horribly cruel acts. If you look throughout the narrative there are instances of Humbert completely glossing over the pain and suffering of others because he's so obsessed with his own pursuits. For me, that was where the narrative began to fall apart and I as a reader could pull myself out of Humbert's beautifully woven spell to think, "Holy hell. That's messed up. Who does this guy think he is?" There was one scholarly article that I read that I really loved called "The Barber of Kasbeam: Nabokov on Cruelty" by Richard Rorty that dealt with this topic. The title of the article is taken from a moment in "Lolita" near the end where Humbert is getting a haircut and the barber is making small talk with him. It's an easy moment to miss because it's so short and Humbert dismisses the barber as old and unworthy of his attention--a petty background character in his heroic narrative. The barber shows Humbert a picture of his son and Humbert isn't paying enough attention to realize that the son died years ago. This man was sharing his very personal pain with Humbert and Humbert didn't even recognize it because for him only certain humans are worthy of attention. Moments like this happen throughout the novel and all of Nabokov's other works and it's the main thing that turned me into such a Nabokov fangirl (sorry for the rant but I couldn't contain it). It's such a shame that so many people dismiss "Lolita" as a nasty novel that validates child molesting because in my opinion the book does just the opposite. Lolita is one of Nabokov's strongest female characters (he doesn't have many strong females in his works, unfortunately) and through everything I think that the reader can pick up on the fact that she is so much more human and badass and worthy of love than Humbert gives her credit for. Many people fail to separate Humbert from Nabokov which I think is a crucial distinction. Humbert is a monster and Nabokov wants us to see that. I think that if Nabokov had any moral to his work--and I'm sure he would argue that he didn't--it would be that we as human beings need to be more attentive to one another. Rereading this book is always more of a treat for me that reading it for the first time because I can see more clearly each time just how much of a monster Humbert is and how he falls into that trap of valuing aestheticism over human beings, of paying too much attention to the beauty of his narrative and not enough to the suffering he is causing on so many levels. "Lolita" is just achingly beautiful is so many ways and I'm a bit obsessed. Edit: In the interest of citing sources...Here's the brief excerpt about the barber: "In Kasbeam a very old barber gave me a very mediocre haircut: he babbled of a baseball-playing son of his, and, at every explodent, spat into my neck, and every now and then wiped his glasses on my sheet-wrap, or interrupted his tremulous scissor work to produce faded newspaper clippings, and so inattentive was I that it came as a shock to realize as he pointed to an easelled photograph among the ancient gray lotions, that the moustached young ball player had been dead for the last thirty years."
Hello Kim! I feel like my response might be pathetically small in comparison to your wonderfully thoughtful comment. I have been reading this over and thinking what you have said through. I really appreciate you for sharing your thoughts on Lolita and Nabokov with me. I feel like I read it too fast and too focused on the language to really catch the more nuanced things that you have pointed out. I feel like I would definitely benefit from rereading Lolita. I would like to look for those moments where the narrative falls apart when Humbert is cruel. I also never thought of Lolita as a strong female character. But the more I think about it, the more I have to agree with you. I'd also like to think more about Lolita while rereading. What Nabokov novel would you recommend reading next?
Emily Cait I definitely didn't think of Lolita as a strong character the first couple of times I read the novel, but my most recent reading has me seeing things that way. It's definitely an interesting question to pose and debate. I'm sure nuanced arguments could be upheld on either side. If you have a bit of time on your hands or are looking for a novel that you can go through with a fine-toothed comb, I would point you in the direction of "Pale Fire" which is a total mind-f*ck of a book. The prose is glistening and magical and you're likely to get completely swept under its current, but the story itself is also a dizzying puzzle. It comprises an epic poem written by the character John Shade, a respected poet and scholar, and a forward, commentary, and index by the character Charles Kinbote, a man who claims to be a friend of Shade's but also a man about whom we don't have much objective information. Kinbote has taken it upon himself to provide the reader with a commentary on the epic poem to help said reader understand what the poem is really about. Through his commentary an entirely new story (or multiple stories) develop and the reader is left to puzzle out who Shade, Kinbote, and the other characters really are and what exactly happened on each level of the story. It can be hard to keep all of the details straight, especially considering that Kinbote is on-par with Humbert in terms of unreliability (that's pretty obvious from the beginning, so no spoilers), so it's definitely the kind of novel you'll want to mark up and put sticky notes in. There's a lot of debate about how you should read it. Some people say to read it straight through, some say to read the poem first then all of the commentary. I would recommend reading the poem first and allowing yourself to wonder at the beautiful language and the story unfolding therein. Then I would suggest you read the commentary, but be sure to constantly flip back and reference the poem so you don't lose track of what the poem says (according to you) and what Kinbote says about what the poem says. Also, don't forget to read the index because it's important (and often amusing) to see how Kinbote catalogs everything. I don't want to give away too much and it's an incredibly difficult story to piece together and recount anyway, so I'll leave it there. The language used in this work is every bit as dazzling as the language used in "Lolita," but it will take a lot of close reading and time to work it all out, so don't rush yourself. Also, keep your eyes out for holes in the narrative such as the ones I mentioned in "Lolita"--moments when the narrator (Kinbote) overlooks things. There are many different planes in the story, and it's important to keep in mind that Kinbote's narration exists on a separate plane from the plot he recounts. There is a lot of humanity in the book and moments of great tenderness and sorrow, but you have to look past the narration in order to see it sometimes. Also, snow, glass, and jewel imagery. So good. The character John Shade is also speculated to be a fictional Robert Frost, and there's lots of writing about the possible meanings/implications of that on the interwebs if you're interested, though it's spoilery. If you don't have tons of time, I would suggest reading his memoir "Speak, Memory." He tells about his life from childhood until the moment when he sets sail for America in 1940. Not only is it beautifully written, but I think it provides a good base for understanding the rest of his work--why he writes the way he does, why he is preoccupied with certain subjects, what those subjects are, etc. It's a fantastic meditation on the mechanics of memory and the language is incredibly sensory (he also speaks specifically about his synethesia and how that affects what he sees). Keep your eyes pealed for imagery of jewels, glass, light, butterflies, and chess. All of those feature in this memoir as well as most of his other works (I haven't read his entire oeuvre yet, so I can't claim that they feature in all of his works). Some of it can seem a little rambling like when he goes on and on about genealogy (Side note: in his books and literary criticism he always tries to connect himself to Puskin because he's a total fanboy and it's amusing to observe), but there's a lot of good material to be found where he meditates on things like cruelty and his regrets about how he treated some people at different points throughout his life. He also spends a lot of time thinking about the value of human existence. Because it's a memoir, there's a lot of interplay between fact and fiction, so watch out for moments when reality seems to melt into something more fantastical. One last note on the book: Watch out for the way he addresses the reader as "you." He is writing to a specific "you" and you begin to realize more and more throughout the book who that "you" is. It's a very intimate memoir (because of the "you") and so the reading experience is quite special. Once you've finished, you should be primed to tackle more of his work with a greater understanding of who he was and the contexts in which he wrote. Happy reading! And let me know how it goes! If you're interested in nabokovian criticism, commentary or discussion, this page has lots of free stuff www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/
Thank you Kim for your incredibly thorough recommendations! I think I might start with "Speak Fire" just because it might be nice to read more of Nabokov's work while knowing more about him. Although "Pale Fire" sounds really cool! :) I'm excited to read both! Hopefully that is something that I can make happen this year.
The author wanted people to sympathize for Humbert but also make you feel a bit sick because of it. This is one of my most favorite books I have read so far and the 1997 movie makes me very happy as well. I feel that movie is much better then the other, the 1997 betrays the book more. This book is truly greatly written.
This book was a very emotional read. I can't say I ever, once, sympathized with Humbert. I was horrified throughout the entire book. The ups and downs and his recount of Lolita's loneliness toward the end of the book and his recognition and acknowledgement of HER pain for the first time drove it home. I don't regret reading it, a total masterpiece. Humbert, however, garnered no sympathy from me. 😐
I'm curious if rereading it now I'd be more critical of Humbert. I recently rewatched the video and I can see past me get so jazzed about the beautiful writing that I did feel sympathy. Honestly not sure if I would 5 years later... :s
I love books that almost force you to read out lout because they're written so beautifully! I did that with White Oleander by Janet Fitch. Great review, I'm eager to pick this one up now! (Too bad about the spoiled ending, though. Talk about frustrating.) Also if you enjoy books with a narrator who is kind of a horrible person but you end up sympathizing with them anyway I highly recommend We Have Always Lived in the Castle by Shirley Jackson.
The Foreword does not in any way ruin the rest of the book, and should not be avoided. It has been written in such a way as not to reveal its secret until one has already finished the novel. To avoid it does not alter an attentive reader's understanding of the work, but doing so is to cheat himself of an elegant solution to an elegant riddle.
I've been putting this book aside for a while, i saw the movie with Jeremy Irons, and while i adore him as an actor, it truly freaked me out, guess i should give it a try after all
I haven't seen the movies, but I can picture Jeremy Irons and I can imagine that being pretty scary. I guess I should find the film adaptation and watch it and see Irons in action. :P I hope you do read Lolita at some point. It was very beautifully written, which might just make the disturbing content worth it.
Nabokov put that forward at the beginning for a reason. It isn't about what happens, and the book can't be spoiled by finding out what does. That atittude really iritates me honestly.
So very cool to hear from someone who loves great literature like I do. You kinda nailed it. 'How can you really enjoy reading something so disturbing'; but it is, both. A deserved classic. Nabokov was a lit- erary genius, no doubt there.
Here's the thing, I read a review of this book where the first time this person read it was when they were 14 years old and due to its "lyrical beauty" this abusive relationship was misinterpreted as a romantic tragedy and of course years later it became clear to them the truth about this abuse. My point is what is the purpose of this this novel. Really I'm trying to understand why no one is finding the way this "relationship" portrayed is not acceptable. Topics such as child rape should be explored however they should not sound one percent beautiful or acceptable I mean we read books and they affect us one way or another what if a 12 year old read this and didn't grasp the danger of such twisted behavior until years later .. by the way I like your videos I just needed to try and see from a different perspective
It's true that the relationship between Humbert and Lolita might be construed as romantic kinda sorta, but I always felt like there were moments where Lolita makes her discomfort pretty clear. I felt like Humbert himself acknowledge that what he was doing was wrong quite often. But maybe these moments that I saw as clear moments of discomfort, that broke anything 'romantic' about the interactions between Humbert and Lolita, could be interpreted differently. Maybe a young person reading Lolita might not see these moments as problematic. I would be curious to hear what younger people reading Lolita have to say about it.
The title is misleading: the book isn't about Lolita per se. The 'relationship', if it can even be called that, is just an exercise in projection by Humbert of his child love onto Dolores. Dolores fits the physical ideal of Annabelle, but her personality is actually off-putting to Humbert, and the same goes for Dolores. The relationship was doomed to fail, for one because Humbert wouldn't really be satisfied with a facsimile of the object of his affection, but mostly because the two didn't fit together at all. The book should be read as a romantic tragedy, but the romance isn't between Dolores and Humbert.
I've been wanting that book edition you have for months. It's looks so cute and innocent, no one would expect the story to be anything but. Sadly the book is very hard to find here in my country, oh well
lolita has a movie too! its lolita. Dolores's real age when it got shot was 14 and i was kinda shocked cause she had to kiss humbert tons. nonetheless its good.
Hi Emily, I realize I'm three years late to the conversation but I just stumbled across your channel. Lovely review. You are what Nabakov calls the "artist/reader". Outside of writing for himself, he writes for the good readers like yourself. Thank you.
Lolita is a 1955 novel written by Russian-American novelist Vladimir Nabokov Lolita (Novel) Book By Vladimir Nabokov (PDF-Summary-Review-Online Reading-Download): www.toevolution.com/file/view/582292/lolita-novel-book-by-vladimir-nabokov-pdf-summary-review-online-reading-download
This is on my 'must read books of 2016', but I have to admit I'm a still little hesitant about Lolita. Not sure how I'm going to feel about reading from Humbert's perspective. On the plus side, I did read the first page before I bought it and it was so beautifully written. Book problems ;-D
Hi. I'm 13 but very immature for my age ( I read the book " the lovely bones " and some other old books and horror fictions ) and I really want to read this book... You've been talking about the writing , something I'm really passionate about since i want to become an author one day. Now , is that really that bad? Like , really really bad? Do you think I should read it? Also note I have to order it online what means my brother ( my parents don't really mind but my brother is a mass ) would see and try to read it too. Oh and my brother is 18. So should I read it? I just finished the lovely bones ( it's about a 14 year old murder and life ) and I'm all about that deep writing , deep book and such. So what do you say? Is it okay for me to read? Thank you so much!
If you know you're very immature for your age, such concepts will not be easy for you to understand or think critically about. But you're now probably 15 ish so go right ahead since I bet you did a lot of growing up in those two years.
I saw the 1962 Stanley Kubrick adaptation of the book and I absolutely loved it! I haven't read the book yet, though I hope to soon. I must ask have you seen the 1962 movie and what did you think of it?
I hated this book. My friend recommended it to me, and like you she said it was beautiful. I thought it thoroughly ugly. The kind of book that is hard to read, with the ocassional beautiful line.
Either you're just here posturing to be a "good man" or you're too much of a dimwit to understand other human beings. This is a great, great story because it's so true to life.
Шик Алёшка Емельянов С оттенком мёда, облепихи, со вкусом их её уста. И взор играющий, то тихий. Тепла, до радостей проста. На ощупь складная, объятна, как точный пазл средь частей чужих и ярких, непонятных. Покоя бухта средь страстей, где кораблю удобно, сыто, где нет иных барж, якорей. Волшебной аурой покрыта средь пыльных зданий и аллей. Всежильно, думно тяготенье, касаньям жаждимый магнит - она. Цветной владеет тенью. Ей каждый мир и взор открыт. И мастера пред ней приклонны. Шарм совокупного добра. В ней ласк невидимые тонны! Она со мной! Ура! Ура! Ура! Ура! ,,,,
Great review! I've been hearing so many great reviews for this, and I'd love to check it out in the future. Love messed up, dark, taboo, psychological books like this. Really gets you thinking by the end.
I just finished Lolita, and I liked the overall story, but occasionally, the details would veer off for like 2 pages...unnecessary flowery details about scenery that could have been shortened. Still I am glad I read this book. It is definitely unique
I'm glad you are excited to read Lolita. It's a beautifully written novel. I feel like the writing is relatively light (I find the writing in a lot of 'classics' to be dense) and there are some really beautiful, chilling, and vivid lines throughout. Definitely worth giving a read, in my opinion. :)
Hello :) I'm a young person of sorts although in 9 days I will be classed as an adult as I will be turning 18. I see you are curious to hear a young person's thoughts on this book. I am reading the book currently and have seen the film so I know what happens already but it still doesn't limit my enjoyment. WARNING:SPOILERS AHEAD I don't necessarily see this as a romance novel due to the complications and the mixed feelings on both sides but I don't see it as black and white as most people see it. People often wrongly believe that a man cannot be in love with a young girl. People often like to question people on the 'trueness' of their love. I believe that Humbert Humbert does truly love Lolita. Humbert Humbert is a highly flawed man. He is by no means perfect. He is incredibly insecure and physically abusive in that he keeps slapping her. He is far more jealous than the normal amount. However, there are young girls such as myself who prefer older men. Lolita I believe does not. I am still not entirely sure what it was she sought after by engaging in this mind game between the two of them. It could have been toying with seduction and power. Lolita is by no means innocent in all of this. She played her part too. I don't think she quite anticipated what she was getting herself in for but she was in no means naive just because of her age. Any woman could have been in the same situation. Humbert Humbert gradually got worse with regards to his behaviour. I think when Lolita realised that she wasn't as in to this mind game as she had been previously, she started to panic and that's when the erratic behaviour started. Also, she has never really gotten over the death of her mother. She is fragile, but I repeat, not because of her age. People often like to patronise young people by claiming they are somewhat an alien and unaware of their own feelings but expected to know lots of things. I don't generally see Humbert Humbert as a pervert. He is manipulative among many other things but a pervert isn't one of them. I will admit however, a few of the things he says in the books, particularly in the beginning are fairly tongue and cheek and can be argued. The use of the 'term' rape in his thoughts are obviously quite alarming. I do feel sympathy for Humbert because in the end, nobody likes a goodbye and when love is unrequited, that love is forever. She is married and expecting and that devastates a person. It is a truly sad ending for both of them.
Courtenay Gray Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the relationship in Lolita! :) I really liked how you talked about young girls preferring older men (and that desire being okay) but that is not something that Lolita desires (which makes it questionable? I don't want to put words in your mouth, so correct me if I've summarized that incorrectly :P). And I think that might be an important distinction to make while reading Lolita. I think it's important to realize the validity of Lolita's sexual desire and curiosity. Although I'm not sure I can get behind a relationship between a young person Lolita's age and an adult. I'm comfortable with the idea that girls Lolita's age have sexual desires and that those desires might be for older people. Lolita's curiosity and her engagement in the mind game seems perfectly fine to me, it's the fact that Humbert Humbert embraced Lolita's 'experiment' of seduction (I don't know how I want to phrase this 100%, but that's my best attempt) that causes me discomfort.
Oh no I know that isn't what she desires which is why I was confused as to what she was actually after. It seems that way at first but you begin to tell that she doesn't like older men :) Personally, age is just a number for me and for quite a few people. I guess, in response to his partaking, I would say that well in a way, she flirted with him and he got the wrong message and genuinely thought she liked him so he was interested. Granted he already has his sights set on her when he first saw her. Regardless of her age, people play mind games all of the time so if somebody starts to heavily flirt and well engage with all of the things they took part in, you are going to think that they like you. I think also the fact that he didn't expect her to like him and so when she showed signs of liking him, that pleased him.
Sweet Lolita She was a playful happy kid who liked everybody and was naturally rebellious toward her mother which Humbert used to his advantage. Predatator extrodaire as Nabokov would say as well as a baboon, his other word for Humbert.
I dislike them... Possibly because mine is old (AKA five years old -- ancient in tech years) and barely functions or keeps a charge :P But that's the kind of sucky thing with tech: by the time you've purchased the newest gadget it's already out of date. Any book on my ereader is barely accessible to me half the time because of lack of updates to support my "outdated" device. I get that ebooks are cheaper, more accessible to folks buying books in languages not easily found in their own country, and easier to store if one doesn't have space. They are also great for students making notes -- being able to search a digital document is a blessing of a feature. (I recently heard about a PhD student at my old uni who may have to rewrite a chapter of their dissertation because they kept physical notes alongside their reading and now can't find/cite a key quotation that they ended up building their argument around. I bet they wish that they had done digital reading/note keeping on a device.) I also understand that there in an incredible amount of privilege to be able to buy and store physical books in the way that I do. I would never advocate for folks not using ereaders/digital books, but I personally avoid them when I can. Hopefully that makes sense?
@@EmilyCait helps a lot.. my desire for wanting one is because you don't need lighting.. but I love the feel of a paperback! I also love the idea of having a paperback collection along my wall &I love the price of paperbacks! And for the cost of a kindle I can buy a lot of used paperbacks! I have over 800 books on overdrive.com lol But that's only ebooks..
The book seems to have some sense of a way that it lures you to pity the bad and he angry with the good.... Which is why I'm never going to read that book 😁
Too long for me. What? Its only 300 pages! Too much padding, too much purple prose, too long to get into the actual plot. It has its moments that shine but I felt this book would have worked much better as novella rather than a full novel.
I hated the book because, it was hard to read. I couldn't stomach it, the only good thing about the book was the end, when he went to jail for his crimes. Humbert Humbert an ugly man with an ugly character driven by lust and anger. Forgive my bluntness. No fancy writing can disguise the horror of Humbert Humberts actions.
Don't get me wrong, you did a great review, but as someone whose native language is Bulgarian (which is really close to Russian), it sounds weird when Russian names are pronounced by an American.
As the protagonist seduces the child, so, too, he seduces the reader. Your review, while not making that point explicitly, makes that implicitly clear. Such is Nabokov's genius.
he's so convincing
@@lisemagdalen he's bery intelligent too, that kind of intelligence psychopaths have, the power to convince others and manipulate them, so you will feel bad for him and think it is just normal what he did
Well you cannot seduce a child. You can rape a child. But a child cannot consent. The character of Dolores is also based on a true life 11 year old girl who was kidnapped and abused shortly before it was written.
While beautifully written, I do not feel that discussion goes far enough into how disturbing it is
@szs voc to be fair, the story features an unreliable narrator who constantly tricks you into feeling sympathy for him, and distracts you from thinking about what's really happening up until the end
@szs voc I'm the person who said that! I think that too, I just also think sometimes use the wrong language to make their point.
those who haven't read "lolita" due to its dark subject matter are totally missing out on the genius of its writing...this is the one that, for my money, qualifies under the rhapsodic rhetoric "how could a human mind do this?"...
agreed
+musgrave68 I do not waste time trying to explain it to those kind of people. Let them miss the greatest fruits of the human race.
musgrave68 It truly is beautiful writing, people are missing out
speedypizza I really don’t think you should be judging people who genuinely have a hard time reading about certain topics
I definitively agree with you as I, personally,consider this book as a brilliant masterpiece in the world literature.
I don't understand why Lolita on the cover is blonde while she has brown hair.
i'm everywhere u brat They thought the book would sell better
Blondes have more fun theory.
His first lost lover was blonde
I personally find Lolita to be a heartbreaking story throughout
Your beautifulll...
@ThatOneAsianBroChick Just wanted to know, is there any similarity with movie Lolita 1997 and the book?
I mean i found something else in the movie. Like the girl was also there who use to do that with her father for hiding or demanding something. I mean the nature of lolita in the movie was not good though. She like to make scene with various man as she describe herself in the movie.
@@rafirehad7462 Lolita is not responsible or to be blamed for anything that happened to her. The narrator of the story in the book is unreliable, which is not a commonly used literary device but it means you cannot trust his point of view on anything. So what you are told about her, is what he thinks about her, and it's unreliable
@@Gilliebeany Brother My question was so simple. Is that how lolita in the book as shown in the movie. Look, I'm talking base on the movie ok, as her father had a bad eye on Lolita. And lolita also did some cheap move with her father. If you have seen the movie then let me remind you of the car scene, while her father went to take her from camp. There I can find a lot of scenes where her father did not interest to do anything but she wanted to do that cause she needed something from him. I'm not telling that all the blame goes to lolita but she didn't seem very good girl in the movie. I just want to know, Is that how, lolita behaves in the book?
@@rafirehad7462 no. I answered your question the first time and if you can't read deeper into the movie than that to see that's not what she actually did, it's what he thinks in order to justify it, I can't help you
yeees omw the thing you said about sympathizing with humbert is the best.
thats the whole point of the book; the dangers of the halo effect (if you dont know what that is, its unconscious bias we have where we think a person is good just because they’re attractive, smart, etc. even if theyre a monster)
because humbert is very intelligent and charming, the reader ends up changing their opinion on him, sympathizing with him, the monster. its a genius book, but people tend to actually believe he’s a good person and end up romanticizing humbert and dolores’ toxic relationship
Great review, I feel the same way, disturbing subject material but beautifully written.
True
I love this book so much, particularly because of how it manipulated me and played with my emotions. I never thought I would be sympathizing with a pedophile, and then this book happened to me.
Perhaps you've haven't experienced a weird old guy watching your every move from 10 yo to 11 yo? My father would certainly have beaten the crap out of him but I was afraid of the power a teacher had over us. Despite the book being "beautifully written" it's still too painful to delve into a creeps mind whether he can write well or not. Perhaps a Nazi has written a piece that is well crafted yet the horrors of the Nazi regime deter us from having any sympathy or love of what is essentially abuse of other human beings? In Nabokov's work we see the victimization of a child - having been there it's too awful for words no matter how well crafted or devised the book may be. It's the subject matter specifically - amazed the book was allowed circulation when Lady Chatterly was banned.
SAME!!
Lolita is an amazing steory, especially for how it's been written. It's probably the best novel I've ever read. Thks 4 your book review.
I don't understand how yall found this book "beautiful" it personally made me uneasy
Fantastic novel. Nabokov uses works like an artist uses a brush to create masterpiece. If you liked Lolita you will probably like Nabokov's "The Enchanter." A story he wrote in 1939 but was published after his death. It is the prototype from which Lolita took shape.
I completely agree, this book was beautifully written and it was so easy to find yourself sympathizing with him, and only when I would put the book down did I realize how horrible that was. I definitely need to reread this in the future, I feel like there was so much I missed. I have Laughter In the Dark on my shelves and really can't wait to read that and more of Nabokov. He is excellent.
Good to see somebody else has reviewed one of Nabokov's books too. I enjoyed your analysis of Lolita, it's a great read.
Quite apart from the immorality of pedophilia, I think the sympathy with Humbert comes from our common understanding of the agony of unrequited love. It’s one layer of the multi-level cake that is this magnificent, heart-wrenching novel.
Lolita is a true, unforgettable masterpiece. Its one of my all-time favorite book. I've read it so many times that I even lost count.
MILD SPOILERS AHEAD
I adore Nabokov and "Lolita." I took a course last semester on his works and I remember discussing at one point how either Nabokov himself or Nabokovian scholars (I forget which) have said that "Lolita" is his love letter to the English language and to America in general. I definitely can see that idea in the beautifully crafted language throughout the book. He writes English in a way that only a non-native speaker could. It's like an outsider's view of the beauty to be found in the sounds and odd connections between words you would not notice or take for granted as a native speaker. His synethesia has a lot to do with his writing as well (which comes out in all of his works, or at least the ones I've read). I think that America is a huge character in the novel as well as a beautiful setting--cross-country road trips, small town USA living, roadside motels, Lolita's obsession with Hollywood starlets, Humbert's narration style which sometimes airs on the side of film noir (especially when talking about himself as this lone, misunderstood antihero archetype). In a lot of ways it's truly an American tale of an Old World immigrant clashing with this New World lifestyle. I remember in one interview Nabokov said that he didn't want any issues of "Lolita" to be published with the picture of a girl on the cover; he wanted a picture of the open road and the American countryside. Unfortunately it's nearly impossible these days to find a copy of the book without a nymphet gracing the cover.
Another thing I loved about this book and Nabokov's work in general is that you can see his writing as a study on human cruelty, specifically on how human beings can lose their touch on reality in the search for beauty and end up casually committing horribly cruel acts. If you look throughout the narrative there are instances of Humbert completely glossing over the pain and suffering of others because he's so obsessed with his own pursuits. For me, that was where the narrative began to fall apart and I as a reader could pull myself out of Humbert's beautifully woven spell to think, "Holy hell. That's messed up. Who does this guy think he is?" There was one scholarly article that I read that I really loved called "The Barber of Kasbeam: Nabokov on Cruelty" by Richard Rorty that dealt with this topic. The title of the article is taken from a moment in "Lolita" near the end where Humbert is getting a haircut and the barber is making small talk with him. It's an easy moment to miss because it's so short and Humbert dismisses the barber as old and unworthy of his attention--a petty background character in his heroic narrative. The barber shows Humbert a picture of his son and Humbert isn't paying enough attention to realize that the son died years ago. This man was sharing his very personal pain with Humbert and Humbert didn't even recognize it because for him only certain humans are worthy of attention. Moments like this happen throughout the novel and all of Nabokov's other works and it's the main thing that turned me into such a Nabokov fangirl (sorry for the rant but I couldn't contain it). It's such a shame that so many people dismiss "Lolita" as a nasty novel that validates child molesting because in my opinion the book does just the opposite. Lolita is one of Nabokov's strongest female characters (he doesn't have many strong females in his works, unfortunately) and through everything I think that the reader can pick up on the fact that she is so much more human and badass and worthy of love than Humbert gives her credit for. Many people fail to separate Humbert from Nabokov which I think is a crucial distinction. Humbert is a monster and Nabokov wants us to see that. I think that if Nabokov had any moral to his work--and I'm sure he would argue that he didn't--it would be that we as human beings need to be more attentive to one another. Rereading this book is always more of a treat for me that reading it for the first time because I can see more clearly each time just how much of a monster Humbert is and how he falls into that trap of valuing aestheticism over human beings, of paying too much attention to the beauty of his narrative and not enough to the suffering he is causing on so many levels. "Lolita" is just achingly beautiful is so many ways and I'm a bit obsessed.
Edit: In the interest of citing sources...Here's the brief excerpt about the barber:
"In Kasbeam a very old barber gave me a very mediocre haircut: he babbled of a baseball-playing son of his, and, at every explodent, spat into my neck, and every now and then wiped his glasses on my sheet-wrap, or interrupted his tremulous scissor work to produce faded newspaper clippings, and so inattentive was I that it came as a shock to realize as he pointed to an easelled photograph among the ancient gray lotions, that the moustached young ball player had been dead for the last thirty years."
Hello Kim! I feel like my response might be pathetically small in comparison to your wonderfully thoughtful comment. I have been reading this over and thinking what you have said through. I really appreciate you for sharing your thoughts on Lolita and Nabokov with me. I feel like I read it too fast and too focused on the language to really catch the more nuanced things that you have pointed out. I feel like I would definitely benefit from rereading Lolita. I would like to look for those moments where the narrative falls apart when Humbert is cruel.
I also never thought of Lolita as a strong female character. But the more I think about it, the more I have to agree with you. I'd also like to think more about Lolita while rereading.
What Nabokov novel would you recommend reading next?
Emily Cait I definitely didn't think of Lolita as a strong character the first couple of times I read the novel, but my most recent reading has me seeing things that way. It's definitely an interesting question to pose and debate. I'm sure nuanced arguments could be upheld on either side.
If you have a bit of time on your hands or are looking for a novel that you can go through with a fine-toothed comb, I would point you in the direction of "Pale Fire" which is a total mind-f*ck of a book. The prose is glistening and magical and you're likely to get completely swept under its current, but the story itself is also a dizzying puzzle. It comprises an epic poem written by the character John Shade, a respected poet and scholar, and a forward, commentary, and index by the character Charles Kinbote, a man who claims to be a friend of Shade's but also a man about whom we don't have much objective information. Kinbote has taken it upon himself to provide the reader with a commentary on the epic poem to help said reader understand what the poem is really about. Through his commentary an entirely new story (or multiple stories) develop and the reader is left to puzzle out who Shade, Kinbote, and the other characters really are and what exactly happened on each level of the story. It can be hard to keep all of the details straight, especially considering that Kinbote is on-par with Humbert in terms of unreliability (that's pretty obvious from the beginning, so no spoilers), so it's definitely the kind of novel you'll want to mark up and put sticky notes in. There's a lot of debate about how you should read it. Some people say to read it straight through, some say to read the poem first then all of the commentary. I would recommend reading the poem first and allowing yourself to wonder at the beautiful language and the story unfolding therein. Then I would suggest you read the commentary, but be sure to constantly flip back and reference the poem so you don't lose track of what the poem says (according to you) and what Kinbote says about what the poem says. Also, don't forget to read the index because it's important (and often amusing) to see how Kinbote catalogs everything. I don't want to give away too much and it's an incredibly difficult story to piece together and recount anyway, so I'll leave it there. The language used in this work is every bit as dazzling as the language used in "Lolita," but it will take a lot of close reading and time to work it all out, so don't rush yourself. Also, keep your eyes out for holes in the narrative such as the ones I mentioned in "Lolita"--moments when the narrator (Kinbote) overlooks things. There are many different planes in the story, and it's important to keep in mind that Kinbote's narration exists on a separate plane from the plot he recounts. There is a lot of humanity in the book and moments of great tenderness and sorrow, but you have to look past the narration in order to see it sometimes. Also, snow, glass, and jewel imagery. So good. The character John Shade is also speculated to be a fictional Robert Frost, and there's lots of writing about the possible meanings/implications of that on the interwebs if you're interested, though it's spoilery.
If you don't have tons of time, I would suggest reading his memoir "Speak, Memory." He tells about his life from childhood until the moment when he sets sail for America in 1940. Not only is it beautifully written, but I think it provides a good base for understanding the rest of his work--why he writes the way he does, why he is preoccupied with certain subjects, what those subjects are, etc. It's a fantastic meditation on the mechanics of memory and the language is incredibly sensory (he also speaks specifically about his synethesia and how that affects what he sees). Keep your eyes pealed for imagery of jewels, glass, light, butterflies, and chess. All of those feature in this memoir as well as most of his other works (I haven't read his entire oeuvre yet, so I can't claim that they feature in all of his works). Some of it can seem a little rambling like when he goes on and on about genealogy (Side note: in his books and literary criticism he always tries to connect himself to Puskin because he's a total fanboy and it's amusing to observe), but there's a lot of good material to be found where he meditates on things like cruelty and his regrets about how he treated some people at different points throughout his life. He also spends a lot of time thinking about the value of human existence. Because it's a memoir, there's a lot of interplay between fact and fiction, so watch out for moments when reality seems to melt into something more fantastical. One last note on the book: Watch out for the way he addresses the reader as "you." He is writing to a specific "you" and you begin to realize more and more throughout the book who that "you" is. It's a very intimate memoir (because of the "you") and so the reading experience is quite special. Once you've finished, you should be primed to tackle more of his work with a greater understanding of who he was and the contexts in which he wrote. Happy reading! And let me know how it goes!
If you're interested in nabokovian criticism, commentary or discussion, this page has lots of free stuff www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/
Thank you Kim for your incredibly thorough recommendations! I think I might start with "Speak Fire" just because it might be nice to read more of Nabokov's work while knowing more about him. Although "Pale Fire" sounds really cool! :) I'm excited to read both! Hopefully that is something that I can make happen this year.
That was DOPE great share!
The author wanted people to sympathize for Humbert but also make you feel a bit sick because of it. This is one of my most favorite books I have read so far and the 1997 movie makes me very happy as well. I feel that movie is much better then the other, the 1997 betrays the book more. This book is truly greatly written.
The music written for the movie is beautiful and suits Lolita so much
This book was a very emotional read. I can't say I ever, once, sympathized with Humbert. I was horrified throughout the entire book. The ups and downs and his recount of Lolita's loneliness toward the end of the book and his recognition and acknowledgement of HER pain for the first time drove it home. I don't regret reading it, a total masterpiece. Humbert, however, garnered no sympathy from me. 😐
I'm curious if rereading it now I'd be more critical of Humbert. I recently rewatched the video and I can see past me get so jazzed about the beautiful writing that I did feel sympathy. Honestly not sure if I would 5 years later... :s
@@EmilyCait you should totally give it a shot! :)
Great review.
That last sentence of the book stuck in my mind. It is painful to read but so beautiful.
what was it? i've never read it before, just curious
I love books that almost force you to read out lout because they're written so beautifully! I did that with White Oleander by Janet Fitch. Great review, I'm eager to pick this one up now! (Too bad about the spoiled ending, though. Talk about frustrating.) Also if you enjoy books with a narrator who is kind of a horrible person but you end up sympathizing with them anyway I highly recommend We Have Always Lived in the Castle by Shirley Jackson.
We Have Always Lived in the Castle sounds amazing (I Googled it!) I have added it to my TBR. If I complete my read 5, maybe I'll buy it!
Emily Cait You won't regret it!
Emily Cait ii
The Foreword does not in any way ruin the rest of the book, and should not be avoided. It has been written in such a way as not to reveal its secret until one has already finished the novel. To avoid it does not alter an attentive reader's understanding of the work, but doing so is to cheat himself of an elegant solution to an elegant riddle.
I've been putting this book aside for a while, i saw the movie with Jeremy Irons, and while i adore him as an actor, it truly freaked me out, guess i should give it a try after all
I haven't seen the movies, but I can picture Jeremy Irons and I can imagine that being pretty scary. I guess I should find the film adaptation and watch it and see Irons in action. :P I hope you do read Lolita at some point. It was very beautifully written, which might just make the disturbing content worth it.
lolita is a masterpiece
Nabovok writes beautifully as he seduces and manipulates the reader. I adore this book.
Nabokov put that forward at the beginning for a reason. It isn't about what happens, and the book can't be spoiled by finding out what does. That atittude really iritates me honestly.
So very cool to hear from someone who loves great
literature like I do.
You kinda nailed it. 'How can you really enjoy reading something so disturbing';
but it is, both. A deserved classic. Nabokov was a lit-
erary genius, no doubt there.
The best book review channel on the planet.❤
Thank you!
Who came here for Lana
me haha
Me too lol
me wahahahahdkwkdjksks
me
Here's the thing, I read a review of this book where the first time this person read it was when they were 14 years old and due to its "lyrical beauty" this abusive relationship was misinterpreted as a romantic tragedy and of course years later it became clear to them the truth about this abuse. My point is what is the purpose of this this novel. Really I'm trying to understand why no one is finding the way this "relationship" portrayed is not acceptable. Topics such as child rape should be explored however they should not sound one percent beautiful or acceptable I mean we read books and they affect us one way or another what if a 12 year old read this and didn't grasp the danger of such twisted behavior until years later .. by the way I like your videos I just needed to try and see from a different perspective
It's true that the relationship between Humbert and Lolita might be construed as romantic kinda sorta, but I always felt like there were moments where Lolita makes her discomfort pretty clear. I felt like Humbert himself acknowledge that what he was doing was wrong quite often. But maybe these moments that I saw as clear moments of discomfort, that broke anything 'romantic' about the interactions between Humbert and Lolita, could be interpreted differently. Maybe a young person reading Lolita might not see these moments as problematic. I would be curious to hear what younger people reading Lolita have to say about it.
The title is misleading: the book isn't about Lolita per se. The 'relationship', if it can even be called that, is just an exercise in projection by Humbert of his child love onto Dolores. Dolores fits the physical ideal of Annabelle, but her personality is actually off-putting to Humbert, and the same goes for Dolores. The relationship was doomed to fail, for one because Humbert wouldn't really be satisfied with a facsimile of the object of his affection, but mostly because the two didn't fit together at all. The book should be read as a romantic tragedy, but the romance isn't between Dolores and Humbert.
I've been wanting that book edition you have for months. It's looks so cute and innocent, no one would expect the story to be anything but. Sadly the book is very hard to find here in my country, oh well
lolita has a movie too! its lolita. Dolores's real age when it got shot was 14 and i was kinda shocked cause she had to kiss humbert tons. nonetheless its good.
I totally got that, so beautiful and then you remember what you're reading! Scary how that's, but excellent literature!
Hi Emily, I realize I'm three years late to the conversation but I just stumbled across your channel. Lovely review. You are what Nabakov calls the "artist/reader". Outside of writing for himself, he writes for the good readers like yourself. Thank you.
Thanks for watching, Sean :)
Lolita is a 1955 novel written by Russian-American novelist Vladimir Nabokov
Lolita (Novel) Book By Vladimir Nabokov (PDF-Summary-Review-Online Reading-Download): www.toevolution.com/file/view/582292/lolita-novel-book-by-vladimir-nabokov-pdf-summary-review-online-reading-download
This is on my 'must read books of 2016', but I have to admit I'm a still little hesitant about Lolita. Not sure how I'm going to feel about reading from Humbert's perspective. On the plus side, I did read the first page before I bought it and it was so beautifully written. Book problems ;-D
Awesome review of this timeless classic Lolita. I enjoyed your review Miss Emily Cait.👍
Hi. I'm 13 but very immature for my age ( I read the book " the lovely bones " and some other old books and horror fictions ) and I really want to read this book... You've been talking about the writing , something I'm really passionate about since i want to become an author one day. Now , is that really that bad? Like , really really bad? Do you think I should read it? Also note I have to order it online what means my brother ( my parents don't really mind but my brother is a mass ) would see and try to read it too. Oh and my brother is 18. So should I read it? I just finished the lovely bones ( it's about a 14 year old murder and life ) and I'm all about that deep writing , deep book and such. So what do you say? Is it okay for me to read? Thank you so much!
+cher bear Definitely. Read it.
If you know you're very immature for your age, such concepts will not be easy for you to understand or think critically about. But you're now probably 15 ish so go right ahead since I bet you did a lot of growing up in those two years.
I saw the 1962 Stanley Kubrick adaptation of the book and I absolutely loved it! I haven't read the book yet, though I hope to soon. I must ask have you seen the 1962 movie and what did you think of it?
I hated this book. My friend recommended it to me, and like you she said it was beautiful. I thought it thoroughly ugly. The kind of book that is hard to read, with the ocassional beautiful line.
You are an idiot...
Either you're just here posturing to be a "good man" or you're too much of a dimwit to understand other human beings. This is a great, great story because it's so true to life.
Is the font in this version of the book small ?
When you said what the book was about, I didn't want to read it. But after your review... I shall try it!
Шик
Алёшка Емельянов
С оттенком мёда, облепихи,
со вкусом их её уста.
И взор играющий, то тихий.
Тепла, до радостей проста.
На ощупь складная, объятна,
как точный пазл средь частей
чужих и ярких, непонятных.
Покоя бухта средь страстей,
где кораблю удобно, сыто,
где нет иных барж, якорей.
Волшебной аурой покрыта
средь пыльных зданий и аллей.
Всежильно, думно тяготенье,
касаньям жаждимый магнит -
она. Цветной владеет тенью.
Ей каждый мир и взор открыт.
И мастера пред ней приклонны.
Шарм совокупного добра.
В ней ласк невидимые тонны!
Она со мной! Ура! Ура! Ура! Ура!
,,,,
Great review! I've been hearing so many great reviews for this, and I'd love to check it out in the future. Love messed up, dark, taboo, psychological books like this. Really gets you thinking by the end.
Why Lolita banned in some countries
This is on my to read list. Disturbing material that is beautifully written is usually very profound
I just finished Lolita, and I liked the overall story, but occasionally, the details would veer off for like 2 pages...unnecessary flowery details about scenery that could have been shortened. Still I am glad I read this book. It is definitely unique
i am still mesmerised by the very first line
Only 1/5th through the book but I feel the exact same way, this book is amazing.
The way she said " I had to catch myself " is exactly what my Ap teacher said.
i love this book so much
Why did you wait a day to read three pages? haha.
Great book by the way, i really enjoyed it even though it was pretty disturbing.
I am so excited to read this book. Can you please tell us more about the writing style?
I'm glad you are excited to read Lolita. It's a beautifully written novel. I feel like the writing is relatively light (I find the writing in a lot of 'classics' to be dense) and there are some really beautiful, chilling, and vivid lines throughout. Definitely worth giving a read, in my opinion. :)
Hello :) I'm a young person of sorts although in 9 days I will be classed as an adult as I will be turning 18. I see you are curious to hear a young person's thoughts on this book. I am reading the book currently and have seen the film so I know what happens already but it still doesn't limit my enjoyment. WARNING:SPOILERS AHEAD
I don't necessarily see this as a romance novel due to the complications and the mixed feelings on both sides but I don't see it as black and white as most people see it. People often wrongly believe that a man cannot be in love with a young girl. People often like to question people on the 'trueness' of their love. I believe that Humbert Humbert does truly love Lolita.
Humbert Humbert is a highly flawed man. He is by no means perfect. He is incredibly insecure and physically abusive in that he keeps slapping her. He is far more jealous than the normal amount.
However, there are young girls such as myself who prefer older men. Lolita I believe does not. I am still not entirely sure what it was she sought after by engaging in this mind game between the two of them. It could have been toying with seduction and power. Lolita is by no means innocent in all of this. She played her part too. I don't think she quite anticipated what she was getting herself in for but she was in no means naive just because of her age. Any woman could have been in the same situation. Humbert Humbert gradually got worse with regards to his behaviour.
I think when Lolita realised that she wasn't as in to this mind game as she had been previously, she started to panic and that's when the erratic behaviour started. Also, she has never really gotten over the death of her mother. She is fragile, but I repeat, not because of her age. People often like to patronise young people by claiming they are somewhat an alien and unaware of their own feelings but expected to know lots of things.
I don't generally see Humbert Humbert as a pervert. He is manipulative among many other things but a pervert isn't one of them.
I will admit however, a few of the things he says in the books, particularly in the beginning are fairly tongue and cheek and can be argued. The use of the 'term' rape in his thoughts are obviously quite alarming.
I do feel sympathy for Humbert because in the end, nobody likes a goodbye and when love is unrequited, that love is forever. She is married and expecting and that devastates a person. It is a truly sad ending for both of them.
Courtenay Gray Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the relationship in Lolita! :) I really liked how you talked about young girls preferring older men (and that desire being okay) but that is not something that Lolita desires (which makes it questionable? I don't want to put words in your mouth, so correct me if I've summarized that incorrectly :P). And I think that might be an important distinction to make while reading Lolita. I think it's important to realize the validity of Lolita's sexual desire and curiosity.
Although I'm not sure I can get behind a relationship between a young person Lolita's age and an adult. I'm comfortable with the idea that girls Lolita's age have sexual desires and that those desires might be for older people. Lolita's curiosity and her engagement in the mind game seems perfectly fine to me, it's the fact that Humbert Humbert embraced Lolita's 'experiment' of seduction (I don't know how I want to phrase this 100%, but that's my best attempt) that causes me discomfort.
Oh no I know that isn't what she desires which is why I was confused as to what she was actually after. It seems that way at first but you begin to tell that she doesn't like older men :)
Personally, age is just a number for me and for quite a few people. I guess, in response to his partaking, I would say that well in a way, she flirted with him and he got the wrong message and genuinely thought she liked him so he was interested. Granted he already has his sights set on her when he first saw her.
Regardless of her age, people play mind games all of the time so if somebody starts to heavily flirt and well engage with all of the things they took part in, you are going to think that they like you. I think also the fact that he didn't expect her to like him and so when she showed signs of liking him, that pleased him.
Sweet Lolita She was a playful happy kid who liked everybody and was naturally rebellious toward her mother which Humbert used to his advantage. Predatator extrodaire as Nabokov would say as well as a baboon, his other word for Humbert.
Ive only seen the movie but now I wanna read it
Thanks a lot for your review Emily! I really enjoyed it! May I translate it into Russian so that Russian book lovers could watch it too?
i really liked your review. i liked this book& movie 1962, 1997
Hello! ^^
This book is also on my tbr. :)
Was this video recorded in your room?
It was! I like to move my furniture around, so if you go through my old videos you will see the bookshelves in different places. :P
Have you read all those books? 👌
I have! I keep my read books separate from my unread books :)
I am currently reading this book😂😂😂n half way through I watched this video damnnn!!! 😂😂
Your opinion on Ereader's ?
I dislike them... Possibly because mine is old (AKA five years old -- ancient in tech years) and barely functions or keeps a charge :P But that's the kind of sucky thing with tech: by the time you've purchased the newest gadget it's already out of date. Any book on my ereader is barely accessible to me half the time because of lack of updates to support my "outdated" device.
I get that ebooks are cheaper, more accessible to folks buying books in languages not easily found in their own country, and easier to store if one doesn't have space. They are also great for students making notes -- being able to search a digital document is a blessing of a feature. (I recently heard about a PhD student at my old uni who may have to rewrite a chapter of their dissertation because they kept physical notes alongside their reading and now can't find/cite a key quotation that they ended up building their argument around. I bet they wish that they had done digital reading/note keeping on a device.)
I also understand that there in an incredible amount of privilege to be able to buy and store physical books in the way that I do. I would never advocate for folks not using ereaders/digital books, but I personally avoid them when I can.
Hopefully that makes sense?
@@EmilyCait helps a lot.. my desire for wanting one is because you don't need lighting.. but I love the feel of a paperback! I also love the idea of having a paperback collection along my wall &I love the price of paperbacks! And for the cost of a kindle I can buy a lot of used paperbacks! I have over 800 books on overdrive.com lol
But that's only ebooks..
Nabokov is a genius
This is my favourite book since i was 16. But i can also recomand you another well written book. Look, homeward, angel, by Thomas Wolfe
Such an amazing book!
It is! :)
Absurdly well written
i am going to start soon
The book seems to have some sense of a way that it lures you to pity the bad and he angry with the good....
Which is why I'm never going to read that book 😁
Too long for me. What? Its only 300 pages!
Too much padding, too much purple prose, too long to get into the actual plot. It has its moments that shine but I felt this book would have worked much better as novella rather than a full novel.
The Coffee Nut While I enjoyed Lolita, I agree that it could have worked well as a novella.
Great review!
Great review thank you
Personally I think the book is gross
Excellent book. Good review, I subscribed.
Thanks :)
I hated the book because, it was hard to read. I couldn't stomach it, the only good thing about the book was the end, when he went to jail for his crimes. Humbert Humbert an ugly man with an ugly character driven by lust and anger. Forgive my bluntness. No fancy writing can disguise the horror of Humbert Humberts actions.
Don't get me wrong, you did a great review, but as someone whose native language is Bulgarian (which is really close to Russian), it sounds weird when Russian names are pronounced by an American.
Hello beautiful book I read this
thanks you
Emily love your channel
Thanks for watching :)
Amazing to read but subject is really discarded
I only read books that I agree with 😡
Just started reading this the other day going in with an open mind lol.
+Aj Koorstra The story is controversial but the writing style amazing
Yeah I get what you are saying! !
Bill "Humbert Humbert" Clinton
This is your most viewed video
Not a good book. You can not sympathise with the main character.
Not a good book? Pff
Don't skip it.