Lolita

by Vladimir Nabokov

'Lolita is comedy, subversive yet divine' Martin Amis, Observer

Poet and pervert, Humbert Humbert becomes obsessed by twelve-year-old Lolita and seeks to possess her, first carnally and then artistically, 'to fix once for all the perilous magic of nymphets'. Is he in love or insane? A tortured soul or a monster? Humbert Humbert's fixation is one of many dimensions in Nabokov's dizzying masterpiece, which is suffused with a savage humour and rich, elaborate verbal textures. Filmed by Stanley Kubrick in 1962, and again in 1997 by Adrian Lyne, Lolita has lost none of its power to shock and awe.

'There's no funnier monster in literature than poor, doomed Humbert Humbert' Independent

• ISBN10: 0141182539
• ISBN13: 9780141182537
• Publish Date: 3 February 2000 (first published 18 August 1958)
• Publish Status: Active
• Out of Print: 8 July 2022
• Publish Country: GB
• Publisher: Penguin Books Ltd
• Imprint: Penguin Classics
• Format: Paperback (B-Format (198x129 mm))
• Pages: 336
• Language: English

Reviews

[Whitney @ First Impressions Reviews]

Impressions on Book

I had not read Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov in a least ten years and after watching the 1962 movie felt it was time to reread the classic novel. When I first read Lolita I remember being shocked by Humbert Humbert’s actions finding it grotesque. On this reread, in a generation jaded by violence and sex, the book seemed tame. The subject matter was still disturbing and there was one forced scene that left my jaw slack. However, with Jared Fogles and catfishing children in chatrooms seemingly more prevalent Lolita did not have the same impact.

I liked that it was told from the perspective of Humbert Humbert, his justifying his behavior was eerie and just wrong and keeps the reader’s attention as to just how sensual Lolita actually was and how much was all in Humbert Humbert’s head. It is not until the end that Humbert acknowledge that what he did may not have been consensual. Even then, I had to question how much of it was for his lawyer’s benefit.

Impressions on Narration

I listened to Jeremy Irons narrate Lolita and it was true book porn. I could listen to him read the phone book — he is that good.

Final Impressions

Overall, I don’t think Lolita was as X rated as it was upon its first publication. Although, it was still an impressive work of literature and is worth the read.

[sarahjay]

It's beautifully written but I can't. I just can't. Why.

[celinenyx]

From the first sentence, I loved the writing of Nabokov. His prose meanders and substitutes, deceives and describes, tempts and rejects. Purely on the word-level, I think this might be one of the best books I have ever read. Rarely am I this impressed by writing itself.

The story of Humbert Humbert the paedophile falling in love with Lolita is cloaked in this prose. If the reader isn't instantly repelled by the theme itself, the reader will get swept up in the strange and demented world of H.H. He is proud, selfish, clumsy and manipulative and an all-round terrible person. Lolita proves again that the main character of a book doesn't have to be likeable to be engaging.

[Michael @ Knowledge Lost]

Lolita is the highly controversial novel of Humbert Humbert, a middle-aged literature professor and his obsession with twelve year-old Dolores Haze. Of whom he becomes a step father as well as being sexually involved. Considered one of the most controversial novels of the twentieth century, Lolita is known not just for the disturbing nature but for the unreliable narration and sophisticated writing style.

Vladimir Nabokov’s masterpiece, Lolita, is one of those books that are worth reading even if it makes you very uncomfortable. The protagonist is the villain who tries so hard to gain the readers sympathy through his sincerity and melancholy. But as the story progress you can even see that he has lost of sympathy for himself and starts referring to himself as maniac who deprived Dolores of her childhood. The novel provides a remarkable perspective into the mind of a man you just want to hate and I will admit it can be a little exciting to watch him go through hell. Nabokov writes a hated character in the hope to knock him around and give him some humility and the reader is left wondering if he will learn from his mistakes.

This has often been described as an erotic novel, even the Great Soviet Encyclopedia called Lolita “an experiment in combining an erotic novel with an instructive novel of manners”. Personally I think of this book as a satirical tragedy with elements of eroticism and remorse. The narrator spends a fair chunk of the book begging the reader to understand that he is not proud of his actions and he is often stricken with guilt at the awareness of robbing Lolita of her childhood. But there is a case to be made at the fact that this is just an exploitation of a weak adult by a corrupt child but this can be problematic and not something I wish to go into great deal about.

The novel as a whole is a very one sided argument, we know how Humbert feels about the entire situation; we hear this to a very sickening degree. He has remorse but his obsession keeps him from ever changing, but one has to wonder what was really going through the mind of Dolores. I have to wonder how she sees the situation or even what she was thinking or feeling throughout the novel. We, as readers, can only surmise since we are forced to absorb Humbert’s feelings.

It is interesting to point out just how two dimensional all the characters are; all except himself and Lolita, which he goes into great detail. It reminds me of life; people tend to describe each other in a two dimensional manner unless we are obsessed with or interested in the person. This technique of writing really added to the realistic feeling of this book.

Lolita was a really awkward and sickening novel to read, there aren’t many books out there that have made me sick to my stomach. Lolita pulls off that feeling that horror novels try to achieve yet often get wrong – that feeling of uneasiness for the reader. This is my second read of this novel, so I knew what to expect and I was able to look past the controversial elements and focus on what this book can offer to the literary world.

Apart from the elements of oppression and an authority figure trying to assert their dominance this book explores tragicomedy, unreliable narration, irony and because Vladimir Nabokov is a Russian it could be a metaphor for totalitarianism. There are many themes you can explore within the novel but the one that will stick in most people’s minds is the lasting damage created by child sexual abuse.

Interestingly enough Vladimir Nabokov is a surrealist often linked to Gogol, Dostoevsky, and Kafka which make you wonder about some of the elements of this book even more. With a love of intricate word play and synesthetic detail Lolita turns into a wry observation of western culture. The novel is full of cleaver word play, double entendres, multilingual puns and in the end when you boil done to why people love it, it is just a beautifully written novel.

You may not enjoy reading this book but you might enjoy having read it. I have to admit that I enjoyed this book more the second time around; there is great beauty to be found in this book and while content makes this book difficult to get through it is well worth the effort. I remember one of my first blog posts on literature was called “What Would You Read in an Introduction to Fiction Course” where I listed the books I’d include if I was to create an introduction to Fiction course and Lolita was one of my choices. Having now reread this book, it just validates my choice even more, there is so much to explore in this book that it has been put back on my list of books to reread.

This review originally appeared on my blog; http://literary-exploration.com/2013/03/30/book-of-the-month-lolita/

[katie-wordsforworms]

Ever wanted to know what makes a pedophile tick? Yeah me neither, but I read this anyway.

http://wordsforworms.com/2012/10/01/banned-books-week-lolita-by-vladimir-nabokov/

[jamiereadthis]

Oscar Wilde said there is no such thing as a moral or immoral book; books are well written or badly written. If that's the case (and I'm thinking it just about is), well: Nabokov writes the hell out of this brilliant, complex, ecstatic little book.