/lit/ - Literature

You've obviously never seen the old Finnish edition.

this one is alright imo

I have yet to see one with child porn on the cover

>>3939650
Look harder

The one with the corner is amazing; what are you talking about?

>>3939656
OK. I will.

here

>>3939616
http://images.uncyc.org/commons/0/05/Pedobear1.gif

>>3939616
i like this one

The bigger question is, why are so many book covers terrible?

I rarely ever seen an actual good cover.

>>3940188
The bigger question is, why the fuck does it matter?

>>3940192
Doesn't particularly, but i'd obviously prefer a good cover to a bad one.

>>3940205
terrible.png

>>3940188

What about older Penguin and Pelican books?

>>3939644

You're kidding, right? That's a prime example of what OP is talking about.

I have this one

yeah, you rotate it like this

>>3940192
I judge books by their covers.

I have this one.

This is the only picture I could find of it, but Nabokov said that this cover, belonging to the Dutch edition, was one of his favorites.

I would like to read this on a train or bus

>>3940666
This one is my favourite. I have this one, which I like too.

So I've been reading Lolita for the first time recently so have had it around in places. What do I say when someone asks what it is about?

I like the OP one, I dont see how it sucks.

>>3940717
you say it's about a very charming hebephile.

>>3940717
A hebophile and his little slut.

>>3940717
you say that lolita wanted it

>>3940717
"It's about a man having sex with a little girl. What? You've never heard of Lolita? Are you some sort of moron?"

>>3940728
>>3940730
>>3940733
>>3940735
I don't think these responses would go down well with my older relativer

>>3940778
tell your relative to stop being a pleb

>>3940778
But that's what the book is about. If you don't want people to know what it's about, don't let them see it.

>>3940708

I have this one specifically because it's my favourite cover. Hawt.

i liked the OP one. it's subtle and moderately well designed.

I just made a thread about this the other day. I plan on reading Lolita soon and was super disappointed about finding out this isn't an official cover for any edition. Probably the best one I've seen.
>>3940666
>>3940670
>>3940697
>>3940708
These are all decent as well.

I think this one works too.

This one is also quite nice.

>>3940697
feet

This is the image on the front cover of my edition. Any artfags will agree that a Balthus image is the perfect choice to adorn a Lolita cover. But in my opinion, I don't think this particular painting of his was the best choice. I kind of hate her face... Don't know why. There is just something off putting. But then again, maybe that's the intention.

>>3939616
dull

>>3939644
hideous

>>3939714
I like the image and the overall cover design, but I don't think it works all that well as the cover for Lolita.

>>3940180
bland

>>3940205
Whoever thought this was a good idea should be fired.

>>3940353
'Annotated'? Are you serious? God that would be hilarious to read for certain scenes. A butterfly isn't a bad choice for a cover image though.

>>3940666
This is probably the ugliest one. Disgusting type. Girl is too young. Muh symbolism.

>>3940670
I can't imagine why. Maybe because all the others at the time were awful.

>>3940697
Too obvious. No subtlety or class.

>>3940708
Best ITT.

>>3941349
Is this real? It's just try hard and doesn't say anything about the book. Is it meant to be Lo staring at the ceiling while she is being fucked? I better stop there - I wouldn't want to validate this shitty cover by over analyzing it.

>>3941353
Eugh... movie still as a front cover. Please kill me now.

>>3941354
Green? Why? Also, anachronisms.

>>3941650
Someone went a bit crazy with the type. And the silhouette makes it seem like a story about a fairy princess.

>>3941680

>>3941349
Is a wall that from far away looks like a little girl's legs rising into (or descending from) her underwear.

>>3941719
Funnily enough, that was my initial thought, which for some reason I immediately discarded.

Still stand by my initial judgement though; tryhard.

have this one
hate it

>>3941733
You didn't understand it but judged it anyway. Then tried to save face by declaring that you were right after it was explained. You sound like a complete idiot.

>>3940666
>>3940697

I like these two.

This one is literally the shittest cover.

>>3941733
>read the thread
No, it's not a real cover. The fact is that (>>3940708) is only one even close to good, but out of hundreds of different covers, that's absolutely ridiculous.

Also, for anyone interested, here's a bunch more covers to look through, each with varying degrees of actually getting it right:
>http://www.dezimmer.net/Covering%20Lolita/LoCov.html

>>3941745
No, I did understand it, when I first looked at it. But for some reason when I got back to it while making the list I had already discarded my initial impression, only having the word 'tryhard' floating around in my head.

You get a sense of how clever the designer thought his concept was, and how that clouded his judgement when it came to designing something which is actually suitable as the cover of Lolita.

It's not real anyway, so debating it is redundant. Nice attempt though.

>>3939616
Oral fixation, likes to be kissed a lot (and also prob have his dick sucked)

>>3940708
I had to hunt down this cover since it is my favourite. I also find it arousing.

>>3940356
genius

This is the best cover.

t's not real though. Source: http://litreactor.com/columns/12-hysterical-offensive-ridiculous-controversial-frightening-sexy-book-covers

>>3941736
>>3941736

I just love the fact that some guy had to go out of his way to get a candid photograph of some 12 year old girl's tits at the beach.

There we go.

>>3940717
>What do I say when someone asks what it is about?
You say "It's Nabokov's most famous novel."

>>3941680
For a painting called "A girl and a cat", the cat sure is done shabby. Guess getting the udnerwear just right took all the creative energy he had.

Good Lolita covers:

- A diver's watch.
- A canyon, looking down.
- A photograph of some vintage '40s Americana road scene, or something similar that's lasted.
- An ocean cove, with the image of Lolita on the towel drawn/pasted in.
- An amalgamation of all of these, like those old '50s covers where you have a mishmash of scenes from the novel sketched.
- A tennis court set against mountains, no figures seen, possibly with a racket or ball reaching into the frame.
- An imagination of the scene of the wall at The Enchanted Hunters.
- An image of Lawn street, a dog running down it.
- Prehistoric cave art.

None of these exist, AFAIK.

>>3939680
>>3941349
Why? I hear people praising it all the time, but it seems completely banal to me. I don't recall a pink wall figuring into the book.

>>3940356
This is brilliant; I'm tempted to print it and scotch tape it to my cover of the edition it redoes.

But it doesn't have any more to do with the book than the first one. It's just clever.

>>3940670
This isn't surprising. Something about the lines gets the book in a way most covers don't.

>>3940708
This seems too sadistic, too horror-y. Which isn't to say Humbert isn't a horrific sadist, but it's not what the book really has going on.

The girl in the picture also looks younger than Lo. And Lo in an ancient ensemble with a dress seems wrong. There should be slacks, the shoes with the small but too big for Humbert heel she left camp in.

>>3943727
is that fucking cp
wtf man

>>3943727
Reported

>>3943727
dude
not cool

>>3943727
Thanks, anon. I just got hired.

>>3943727
b&hammer in 3, 2...

>>3943727
Enjoy your arrest; they're coming.

>>3943727
You do know that mods take shit like this very serious?
And you do know that moot works with the cops?

>>3943727
I'm afraid that gen. pop. doesn't take kindly to child diddlers. So sorry.

>>3939616
The absolute shitty story ruins the beautiful prose.
If you can completely erase your mind from the story then you will be okay. It's such a fucking bore.

WHY CAN'T THERE JUST BE A DECENT COVER FOR THIS BOOK?

>>3943768
>The absolute shitty story ruins the beautiful prose.
it's like you guys who're 12 year olds who can't understand literature beyond its surface value. and you make fun of movietards for only caring about plot.

>>3943769
DESCRIBE WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER A DECENT COVER

>>3943777
The story IS complete shit.
How it is written is BEAUTIFUL
The story and all the 'meaning' behind it was shit. There is no 'insightful meaning to the pedo in all of us' There is nothing.

>>3943777
How about you lrn2read

Nabokov fucked kids in real life, right? Why else would he write this? And Ada?

>>3943796
Lolita is not pro-child abuse

jesus, you people

>>3943800
Nice strawman. I was suggesting that he fucks children, not that he advocates it.

>>3943779
Something I'd actually want to look and and ponder over once I stop reading a few chapters or so. Something subtle and not a damn still/psoter shot from the movie or a mouth or something. Put a girl on there or something, but don't make it so obvious. I don't know, I haven't read the book yet (about to) but I'm trying to find one with a artwork that at least somewhat matches what the book is about. Which isn't to say the ones presented ITT or the page in this link (>>3941760) fail entirely, but come on... WTF is this, for example?

>>3943792
the prose is a function of the story. if you can't understand what he's trying to do with the two then I suggest you stop reading because the point of lolita isn't simply pretty prose.

>>3941349
This is the one I am using for my e-reader. I love it to pieces.

>>3943814
I say we write a letter to Penguin or whoever to get them to make this the official for the next reprint or something.

op just tape on the cover from that lil' lupe dvd you have under your mattress

>>3943824
MODS PLX

>>3943811
The prose was great, the story was still shit. You can respect the way a story is written and yet damn the story itself.

>>3943829
Why did I laugh?

>"Hey anon, what are you reading?"
wat do

>>3943817
Oh, I'm game. It's so terribly elegant.

where are mods?

>>3943843
too busy banning people for daring to criticize zionism

>>3943842
...except I'm retarded and can't really pinpoint what publisher publishes the book in which country and all that. Well. Maybe start up a petition or something and then find out who to send it to?

>>3943854
I don't know. Maybe just having us and a select few use it as our cover makes it just that more special. Also, I'm too drunk to really think hard at the moment, and that just seemed like a really, really good cop-out.

>>3943824
mods come on

>>3943866
post some anti-simitic comics they'll come in a second

>>3943868
not down with anti-semitism either

>>3943854
>>3943862

P.S. I really do use it as my e-book cover, and do really like it.

>>3943869
well if u want speedy service from the mods that's the only thing they care about really

>>3943862
>tfw haven't drank since Mad Men went off a few weeks ago
>tfw trying not to binge drink waiting for BrBa to come back on next month
That's a bit off-topic but tbh I was thinking of taking like a grassroots approach to it (WE MUST FIGHT FOR WHAT IS ON THE COVER OF THE LOLITA BOOK WE SPEND OUR MONEY ON) and all might actually go someplace but I've also kind of lost the motivation myself. Maybe I should just shut up and read the damn thing.

>>3943872
>implying I have an e-book reader
My mom has a Kindle and all she does is play knock-off Tetris and slots.

>>3943873
>Someone posted CP that's a felony in America and pretty much every other civilized nation? yeah, after i finish episode of game of thrones...
>someone posted one of those jew comics that are poor taste but not illegal? quick GO GO GO!

lol, what happened in here?

>>3943824
>cp stays up for over 30 minutes
I guess the mods assume lit takes care of itself

>>3943874
Dude, I think you need to e-mail me. Seriously. I think we'd get along swimmingly. Maybe that's just me being me. I've always wanted to watch Mad Men, but never got around to it. I should really fix that. BrBa is also extremely good.

Well, that pic was submitted in come cover-art contest right? So we'd have to get the artist actually on board.

You should read it. I'm only about half-way through it, but I'm really enjoying it. It's the first book I've actually liked reading since The Tin Drum several months back.

P.S. Why are captchas so fucking difficult?

>>3943885
not clicking a spoilers image ever again...i'd rather get caught with a kilo of heroin than cp bro

>>3943887
It does for the most part, I think it's art, but it's still NSFW

>>3943876
Whattawaste. I have an i-Pad that my brother gave me since I no longer have a laptop.

>>3943894
I actually just came here after seeing a thread in /q/ call Richard Dawkins a shitty atheist
I'm pretty picky with books, but 4chan usually lines up with my tastes in just about everything else

>>3943885
kill yourself

>>3943891
If you think BrBa is good and you haven't watched Mad Men (and not to mention you're on /lit/), you'd probably get really into it. People say nothing happens on there but they are just those kinds of plebs? that need explosions and guns and titties every 2 seconds.
Captchas are so hard because you don't have a 4chan(TM) Pass (COPYRIGHT)!
Captchas

>>3943885

leave

>>3943909
That's what I was thinking. I've wanted to watch it ever since I saw it available at the library when I decided to rent the entire show of Deadwood. I've had a Netflix account for a while now (and saw that Mad Men is on it), but I've only ever really used it to fall asleep to Law and Order.

>>3943803
Lol. Good work. 9/10