/lit/ - Literature

>Nabokov (author) has written so good a book examining him that many still think that “Lolita” is a love story and not the memoirs of a sick man who repeatedly raped a girl

This is the genius of Nabokov. His prose is so enthralling that even bluepilled leftist English majors can overlook his plotlines.

>>14988492
even dumb white girls on with youtube commentary channels can overlook his plotiness. He truly is a genius

It's been a while since I've read Lolita, but I think at one point Nabokov criticises psychoanalysis in Lolita. What did he mean by this?

>>14988480
I remember a French critic comparing the main character to Gabriel Matzneff, an author and self-proclaimed pedophile who wrote almost exclusively about it - including heaps of exhibitionist autofiction, or not even fiction since he published his very diaries (living the lit meme, eh).

Who is HH if not an intellectually and literarily sterile man whose oeuvre is merely to cast a flowery veil of taxinomy on his most degrading instincts? This is precisely Matzneff in all his wretchedness.

The critic concludes, rightfully so in my opinion, that Nabbie has liquidated the figure of the pedophile with his book. Without resorting to basic moralism. Such is the greatness of Lolita.

>>14988480
i hate the title, i can't read it in public

>>14988480
hello newfag

>>14988622

Woah... amazing... no one's ever sunmarized a plit like THIS before...

>>14988480
Reminder: Lolita was using her body as an asset with which to abuse Humbert

>>14988622
Nigga, I carried a version with this cover around my high school and nobody gave a fuck

yeah nothing ruins a girls childhood like a loving relationship with her dad

>>14988480
>go kill the man that helped save your “daughter”
>drug-addict pornographer
ahblooooo hooooo

>>14988480
I thought the whole point was to experiment flowery language with a revolting plot.... Wasn't it?

>>14989243
yea quilty was arguably the more nefarious character in this rotten scenario, yet at the end lo says that she would sooner go back to him than HH

really makes you think

>>14988480
>many still think that “Lolita” is a love story and not the memoirs of a sick man who repeatedly raped a girl
Only retards, closet pedos, and people who haven't actually read the book think this. There are a lot of them, though.
>>14989243
Quilty did nothing wrong, and he was probably a homo with no interest in Dolores.

>>14989243
>>14989340
>>14990254
Ngl the Quilty bit of this book is the only thing I don't get.
What is the purpose of it? I personally thought Humbert had just completely lost it by that point and it didn't happen, or maybe he was pretending he had lost it to get an insanity defence or something like how he tricked the psychiatrists when he was institutionalized.

based and pedopilled

>>14988948
>The only convincing love story of our century
Media jews can be based sometimes.

>>14988480
Alizee was perfect though

>>14988480
>he man that helped save your “daughter”
That dude was a pedo too,and even more of a degenerate than Humbert.
anyways this is brainlet missing the point. kys, OP.

>>14988480
read more nabokov you giganigger
lolita was a shitty flick he made in US

>CMPL 477. Wicked Desire: Vladimir Nabokov, Lolita, on Page and Screen. 3 Credits. Vladimir Nabokov's novel Lolita (1955) became a global phenomenon due to its unflinching portrayal of pedophilia. This course will delve deeper into the novel's moral complexity, its international context, and its reflection in mass culture, including movies by Stanley Kubrick (1962) and Adrian Lyne (1997). Taught in English; some readings in Russian for qualified students.
Should I take this? I read Lolita several years ago and enjoyed it and I've seen the Kubrick film a couple times. Could be cool to dive into the novel and learn more about Nabokov in the process

>>14990276
sounds like you’re the one who lost it m8

>>14990662
A course on a Nabokov novel sounds like the biggest pseud magnet on Earth

>>14988952
yikes

>>14991750
So this is how I find my people...

i think HUMBERT HUMBERT(or maybe herbet is is real name based on a interesting line i found re reading the text) geuinely feels remorse for what he did in the end he geuinely seems to regret his actions and specifically states that he doesnt want his book published until both he and dolores(who was a slutty brat desu) were dead and accepts his fate in jail

>>14991800
be very careful what you wish for, anon

>>14991851
whats the line

>>14988948
Wish this cover wasn't out of print. It's the best one.

Girls like Dolores don't end up well anyway, regardless of whether or not they meet a Humbert. If she didn't meet him, she would have found another guy to exploit and manipulate in some way.
Knew a ton of girls like this. Hit on guys when they're 13, pregnant and on drugs by 16. It's not the Humberts of the world that force them to behave like this. It's their shitty upbringing and usually the parents' fault.
If you think Humbert was solely at fault then you missed Nabokov's point entirely.

>>14988587
He believes in an aesthetic approach to life and analysis, so things just are. Creating a justification and reason for something cheapens it. He also furthers this in pale fire how anyone could read anything into art.

>>14988587
Because psychoanalysis only works on real people. Fictional characters do not have a "psyche" you can analyze, and in trying to do so, you miss the entire point of the work.

>>14990434
>sending her pussy scent to the audience to entice them
Based

>>14990434
How do you guys sleep at night knowing you will never have anything this beautiful

>>14988480
>go kill the man that helped save your “daughter” because you’re a sick asshole
>The man who help saved her
>Harvey Weinstein-style Pedowood type
>Dolores mentions how he had a ranch full of underage girls
He's demonstrably worse than Humbert in just about every way.
>>14990276
I think Quilty was meant largely as a foil to Humbert but also a reflection of his ego. Quilty beat Humbert at just about everything (Dolores loved him and almost forgot Humbert did anything to her, the clues at the hotel implied he was smarter than Humbert, he was richer, he had more than one "nymphet" love, etc.). I think the fact that Humbert's "meditations of his love" end in him killing a guy in a jealous rage is meant to establish the extent to which he only sees his "Lolita" as his property and an extension of his ego.
>>14991851
>(who was a slutty brat desu)
Lmao idk about slutty since she's just dumb and doesn't know what she's doing, but she's definitely an irritating bitch. I wasn't able to sympathize with Humbert after he stayed with her while he thought the police were following him and she was helping them. Hell, she got annoying to me in that first road trip. But I guess that's the point, Humbert only sees his coomer fantasy of her.

Do you want propaganda or compelling story and exploration of a subject? The whole thing is interesting only because it could be labeled consensual, at least at the start. You can explore more nuanced and interesting aspects of wrongness when the protagonist is alluring and has a big traumatic reason for his longing and the girl was enamored by him and did the first big move on him.
The middle part moves completely away from that though and I don't see how it can be treated as a love story from that point onward. I mean he makes her fondle him while he watches as girls leave school and calls it a simple hobby and is annoyed that she isn't understandable of it. He buys sexual favors from her and specifically describes that she was never into it. He threatens what she values the most, her freedom, to make her cling to him. He doesn't even try to stop looking at other girls. How many romance novels include protagonist constantly checking out other women than the one he supposedly "loves".
This part I honestly don't get: how did he move on from his obsession so quickly? I would imagine someone being drunk with the whole situation for far longer than a year but judging from his description he moved on from "fantastic" to "eeeh, pretty good" in like a month.

>>14992104
>he moved on from "fantastic" to "eeeh, pretty good" in like a month.
Books can compress time. Also, repeated indulgence in one's desire can make it mundane quickly. Which is why hedonists and the like always chase the new high and new extreme to be exhilarated by.

The movie was kino

>>14992181
The Kubrick one or the Jeremy Irons one? I haven't seen either and just finished the book last week.

>>14992181
both movies are mediocre

>>14992262
kubrick's is a genuinely good movie, if quite far removed from the original source material for obvious reasons, and a great snapshot of a particular period in american history (that oddly mirrors the novel's setting). and if compared to nabokov's terrible script treatment it's a miracle this one turned out so well

the 1997 version is awful, one of the worst movies of all time (and not in a fun way, but a sad and treacly way). it's like a long shitty nineties music video. do NOT waste your time on it; seek out the jeremy irons audiobook instead, which is the single redeemable product of this mess

>>14992426
>it's like a long shitty nineties music video.
Ah, the classic Baz Luhrrman approach. I'll be avoiding it. Disappointing to hear that as a fan of Irons, but I guess I'll use that free Audible book they're giving out to get his reading instead. Thanks, fren.

>>14992480
>I guess I'll use that free Audible book they're giving out to get his reading instead.
absolutely do that! it's so much fun

>>14992426
Extremely terrible taste anon

>>14993073
are you a defender of the adrian lyne movie? lmao

>>14991894
i see your opinion and raise you this one

>>14991920
victim shaming cringe, have sex

>>14993407
I hope he has sex with you.

>>14993542
owo

>>14988492
muh social construct

>>14992426
Both films are awful.
The audiobook is the best audiobook there is.

>>14993199
That's not how I imagine Lolita to be at all desu.

>>14996271
>Both films are awful.
no
>The audiobook is the best audiobook there is.
yes

>>14988480
>that part when he coofs on her

>>14996277
This one is quite a bit older than 12.

>>14995607
The greatest social revolution of our time was taking the nigger word back from the nigger so that we can have more tête de nègre’s and negerkuss’.

>>14996360
Okay then you find a girl you think she looks like.

I don't think anyone who has read the book thinks it's a love story. The condemnation of the pedo is too obvious and hard.

>>14996447
You overestimate women's critical thinking skills.
I know many roasties who think it's a beautiful tragic romance and want a boyfriend like Humbert.

>>14988480
The Harvey Weinstein character was constructed by Humbert in order to have him be the hero fighting an even bigger asshole than himself

>>14996927
boring take

>>14996927
Seriously, this anon >>14997290 is right. "It was all in his head oooohhhhh". Like who gives a fuck then?

shit /lit/ is infected. guess this is why bookstores have hand sanitizer

>>14988480
>rape her
Uh, she knew exactly what she was doing and she was consenting.
Also girls her age were married all the time in the past. She's 12, she has tits, hips, everything, how is that rape or pedophilia or whatever.

>>14997352
Kill yourself degenerate. You are nothing but scum.

>>14996927
He's a "sleazy pornographer" character first of all you fucking embryo. And it's a continuity of the hidden America milieu. This book is not a classic to me but it was very fitting in a novel all about the false facade of road trip heartland America

>>14993199

>>14988480
Literally did nothing wrong -coughs-

>>14988480
I was reading that book you fucking faggot

>>14996376
She probably looked like Jordyn Jones circa 2015.

>>14998092
How bad are things?

>>14998092
privileged knowledge? suck my dick. everything is everything

>>14988622

stupid American

>>14989243
>>14990254
>>14990276
Ehem... Quilty was Lolita's first lover... That's how she knew all those sex things.

>>14992426
I consider Lolita to be Kubrick's worst film. He simply couldn't deliver.

>Humbert's thoughts and writings were exactly like the manuscripts my hebephile grandfather left behind
Nabokov got that grandiose, narcissistic, manic tone just right. The grammatically incorrect French was genius, too.

>>14988480
>reading romance sex garbage to begin with

>>14999273
Post it

>>14991984
In 43 I have fucked so many dime tier sluts I dont even remember how many at this point and dont really give a fuck about bitches anymore because I am only intersted in gnosis

>>14991920
idk why smallbrains can't accept the tiniest bit of nuance and get that HH was a predatory monster but Lolita was also basically a little sociopath

>>14999913
haha- that's great

>>14992426
I watched the 1997 version when I was like 15 and I remember enjoying it because of its cosy road trip atmosphere. Kinda want to rewatch it now.

>>14996277
me on the right

Has anyone read Speak, Memory? it's his best

>>14999049
EXTREMELY BASED TASTE

>>14996512
the truly big brain take is that they are right but can't explain why. CUNNY

>>14988587
>It's been a while since I've read Lolita, but I think at one point Nabokov criticises psychoanalysis in Lolita. What did he mean by this?
Almost every single Nabokov novel contains some kind of potshot at Freudianism.

>>14991965
isn't writing characters a test into how realistic you can simulate them?

>>14997669
this and the vintage international one with the lips get me pp hard

>>15000163
How was she a sociopath?

>>14988480
You forgot about Gray Star.

>>15000791
Read theory

>be innocent man
>get seduced by superfluous girl child
>give her everything
>she throws you away for another man the moment she gets bored with you
Many such cases. It's sad that so many otherwise bright people are bamboozled by this.

>>14988948

>>14988480
>Pedophilia
>Objectively bad
Very spooked, aren't you?

>>14988492
>Claiming the concept of the unreliable narrator is genius to own the libs.

Most of the plot is a roadtrip that showcases everything that is absurd and wonderful about American culture through the perspective of a pretentious European pervert. THAT is the genius of Nabokov.

All I've got to say is that after forcing myself to read a bunch of dry as fuck "classics" over the last year, reading this has been a breath of fresh air.
I actually can't remember how long it's been since I was looking forward all day to getting back to my current book.

>>14988492
>Nabokov (author) has written so good a book examining him that many still think that “Lolita” is a love story and not the memoirs of a sick man who repeatedly raped a girl

This is actually why bluepilled leftist English majors like his plotlines.

>A legion of horribles, hundreds in number, half naked or clad in costumes attic or biblical or wardrobed out of a fevered dream with the skins of animals and silk finery and pieces of uniform still tracked with the blood of prior owners, coats of slain dragoons, frogged and braided cavalry jackets, one in a stovepipe hat and one with an umbrella and one in white stockings and a bloodstained weddingveil and some in headgear of cranefeathers or rawhide helmets that bore the horns of bull or buffalo and one in a pigeontailed coat worn backwards and otherwise naked and one in the armor of a spanish conquistador, the breastplate and pauldrons deeply dented with old blows of mace or saber done in another country by men whose very bones were dust and many with their braids spliced up with the hair of other beasts until they trailed upon the ground and their horses’ ears and tails worked with bits of brightly colored cloth and one whose horse’s whole head was painted crimson red and all the horsemen’s faces gaudy and grotesque with daubings like a company of mounted clowns, death hilarious, all howling in a barbarous tongue and riding down upon them like a horde from a hell more horrible yet than the brimstone land of christian reckoning, screeching and yammering and clothed in smoke like those vaporous beings in regions beyond right knowing where the eye wanders and the lip jerks and drools.

I might be small brained but I find this disembodied sort of narration to be voiceless. Lolita is the only literature I've enjoyed and my enjoyment came from the personality that burst out of the narrator. I wouldnt call this excerpt purple, but it doesn't seem to care about directness. Shouldnt a description have aim? Words are pegs to hang ideas on. As with all McCarthy books we'll have to wait for a director to add the much needed direction and soul to the "elegant", "literate" and even "mannerly" groundwork so that it can finally become something that means something.

If you ever meet a girl who wears chokers and says her favorite book is Lolita, you need to marry that shit.

>>15001930
based

>>15002398
sounds like a whole heap of trouble down the road

Reading the book I saw Lolita as an extremely tragic character who has to die as a damaged child and never lives to become an adult, a mother, the next stage in her life.
In the 1962 film where Lolita is 14 and the actress 15, she comes across as way too mature and sophisticated in this film and I don't feel the same sympathy for her.
In the 1997 film Lolita is 14 and the actress is 15 but looks way older. She acts insanely childish for her age and looks, comes across as kind of retarded more than childlike, I found her really annoying. I felt some sympathy but overall I found it hard to see her as a child despite the blatant ham-fisted attempts of the director to do so.

>>15002511
ok

>>15002511
Do either of the movies have a shot where a wanted poster merges into Humbert's own face, like Humbert suggested in the book?

>>15002552
No, I don't think so. The 1997 version's your best bet if you want to see and hear parts of book on screen. It's not a brilliant film but Jeremy Irons was perfect as Humbert. Has that adaptation problem where the book is a 10/10 and the film is a 6.

>>14991965
>implying the difference between what you see and what someone else sees gives rise to a psyche

>>15002610
>the book is a 10/10 and the film is a 1
ftfy

>>15002722
I'm just glad we agree about the book. I was being too kind with a 6 honestly, every film original scene was cringe worthy.

Childhood is already over by 12

>>15002761
Yeah, if you live in a third world country

>>15002849
I think he has misconstrued the loss of innocence with the loss of childhood.

>>14990474
It's a clash of cultures, a new world forward degenerate vs an old school English prude. Nabakov probably felt this moving to America.

>>14990434

>>14988948
not trying to be a dick but they definitely called you 'the dude with the pedophile book' behind your backerino

>>14988683
This has to be the most beta thing imaginable.

>>14997669
the question is, is it the top of the breast, or the top of the ass?

>>14991851
Are you the real Quentin?

>>15004126
they were in vogue in my 6th grade class room, hold your tongue

>>14996277
waaay too old

>>15004141
it's her armpit.

>>15004313
really?

>>14988597

Preposterous assumption that Nabokov had any moral agenda or intentions in mind.

>>14988492
> the memoirs of a sick man who repeatedly raped a girl
The retardation of the neat, reductionist labels.

what do we make of nabokov recycling the pedo and/or incest themes in nearly every book after lolita?

>>14996447
Do you think Humbert loved her? Maybe not love in the way normal people think about it with rainbows and butterflies, but I do think he loved her.

>>15002849
it's when puberty starts, retard.

>>15006495
Well he loved her at that time. And even tried to see his life with her ,but even then he could not let go of his pedo fantasy with other girls, so not real love.