2021 EDIT: My new rating reflects the book's prose and literary accomplishments only. For there is no enjoyment here. I can no longer on any level of conscience and humanity and decency say that I "like" 'Lolita'. It is among the most misunderstood - and controversial, for good reason - novels of all time. What is more disturbing than its content is how many people don't seem to see it as disturbing and disgusting (IT IS NOT A ROMANCE!!! WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!?). And I wish not to be in the head of a paedophile and world class narcissist while reading anything. To be made privy to the rambling thoughts, obsessions, delusions and victim blaming excuses of the worst of monsters - constantly, in great length - does not constitute a good, healthy and safe time.
This monster protagonist deserves no sympathy. He deserves nothing.
Good day.
Final Score: 3/5
Original Review:
Another highly-acclaimed classic which, of course, I had to read.
There are a lot of themes and elements to explore in 'Lolita', despite its simple premise and pages and pages of witty and profound prose (mainly descriptions of settings and of Lolita herself). I will write about what affected me the most in experiencing one of the most controversial novels in literature.
'Lolita' is one of the most disturbing things I've ever read, with a disgusting protagonist. Yet I could not put it down - it has that power.
Set after World War II America, it stars Humbert Humbert, a paedophile. It is suggested that he lusts after underaged girls - who he calls "nymphets" - because of an unfinished sexual experience he had at a young age. His first love, Annabel, died unexpectedly of typhus.
Throughout his story - which he writes whilst in prison - the reader grasps just how despicable he can truly be in possessing whoever he wants. He will do anything for Dolores Haze (whom he internally calls "Lolita") - no, he will do anything TO Dolores, in order to possess her like a prized doll: a monument who'll stay forever young so long as he wills it on her.
Without spoiling much I'll just say that during the course of 'Lolita', Humbert - a supposedly charming, handsome college professor married twice to older women for various reasons - kidnaps the innocent twelve-year-old Lolita, drugs her so he can rape her (though manages to stop himself; the raping, I mean), tries to win her over with shallow gifts, and overall tries to control everything in her life. He even considers murdering her mother, so that Lo can be his. Due to unforeseen circumstances, she does become his. He ruins her life.
My favourite line in the book is when Dolores says to Humbert (or so he thinks), "HE broke my heart. YOU merely broke my life." (p. 318 of my copy).
Yes, 'Lolita' is not a romance, or even a tragic romance. It is just a tragedy.
Because you do not hurt or intend to control someone you love. Love is not about attempting to change a person so that they submit to your will. Humbert may love Lolita, or think he does, but despite his insistence that he is immortally true to her, he may only love her like a child loves his toy truck - a possession to be controlled, thrown about and then discarded when he gets bored with it. Love is about looking at a fellow human being with equality and understanding. Humbert's "true love" is a projected fantasy: it is abusive and sick, even for a rightfully-illegal relationship.
Thankfully, Vladimir Nabokov does not expect the reader to sympathize with Humbert. He is, in truth, a pathetic character. Really, his only redeeming quality is his poetic way of speaking and thinking. He has witty insights about life and people's attitudes to things. While I sometimes thought they were overused (indeed, the book would be a lot shorter without so much straying-from-the-action), they felt organic and real. Which made 'Lolita' an even more scary and uncomfortable experience. Also, Humbert is an unreliable narrator, so readers cannot trust everything he tells them (not even his name). For example, when he says that young Dolores deliberately seduced him with her body and minx personality. She wears a bikini in her back garden when the sun's out - the femme fatale! And that gives him reason to abuse her, without much restraint. Right.
I always thought Lolita herself was just a normal twelve-year-old girl, who acted and talked like a twelve-year-old girl would. She reads magazines, hangs out with girlfriends, likes sweets and fashion, and is spoiled. She may be sexually aware - which shocks Humbert - but she's at that age. I think a lot of adults, those from earlier times especially, underestimate how much preteens know about sex. Also, Lolita may or may not be as naïve as Humbert says she is - again, he is unreliable. And it is hypocritical and appalling that he would think her indecent (like he can talk!) for being in other relationships, because she should be only his pure-bodied object. And the reader might find that Lo's tragic failings are all Humbert's fault.
I've also noticed that any woman who is not a "nymphet" is described in unattractive ways by Humbert. They are either fat, pudgy, gangly, old, nosy, whiny, or all the above. It is possible that he cannot see or refuses to see older woman like he sees his young objects of desire. Even when he realises that Dolores can be annoying and whiny - as children often are - he does not give up on her. Lolita is his true love - no, his obsession: his projected image of perfect human beauty, young and innocent.
There are moments of insight, however, where Humbert acknowledges his faults, and that he is depraving Lo of her childhood. He is torn between his illegal, sick passions and his common sense as a poet and educated man. He tries to reason his evil actions caused by lust, but it makes him look all the more pathetic. His descent into madness becomes clearer as his lust consumes him. While not once did I feel sorry for him throughout the entire course of the novel, I can see why he would be considered a tragic figure.
What I find to be even more disturbing than 'Lolita''s content is what I've heard from some readers who do sympathise with Humbert; they blame Lolita, the victim, for his downfall. What is our society coming to? Victim blaming - especially if the victim is twelve-years-old - is never okay. And again, we cannot hang on Humbert's every word, him being an unreliable narrator. It is hinted that he might be (or growing to be) deranged in his unhealthy (putting it mildly here) lust for Lolita.
But maybe the novel is just that powerful and rich that it can possibly make you feel for a paedophile. That was not how it worked for me, however. I just read the POV of a monster with a lyrical mind, whom a ton of lucky and unlucky coincidences happen to (the novel is slow in progression, but it makes up for it with little thematic titbits, and writing that gives us time to absorb atmosphere).
So while 'Lolita' did not make me sympathise with a paedophile, it did its job in leaving me with a feeling of complete euphoria after finishing it, as Nabokov intended. It is a strangely enriching experience. It is something special to marvel at, despite its shocking content. Humbert Humbert is a character with many layers; a monster you can't help but read about.
You can interpret so many things about 'Lolita', and that is what makes it a classic, I believe.
Final Score: 4/5
No comments:
Post a Comment