To think that 'Lolita' is an amazing literary masterpiece?

[Electrascoffee]

I have never wanted to read this book until now, having seen the film which, imo has done the book a great disservice.

Having read it now I think the narrative is exquisite. The book is in no way suggesting that paedophilia is acceptable or normal - quite the opposite in fact. Humbert is clearly a monster - the author leaves us in no doubt about that.

My friend said it's 'a pervy book' but he's never read it! The film, I feel tried to present Humbert in a more sympathetic light which is very annoying.

In my opinion it's a masterpiece that was way ahead of its time. And challenges views about misogyny, victim blaming culture in our society wrt sex crimes.

I agree OP. I haven’t read it for close to 20 years but it is a classic imho

It's a work of genius but one of the reasons it is so brilliant is that it is open to different interpretation dependant on the mindset of the reader. I was horrified, but have read reviews where the reviewer takes a different view.

It was on my English literature degree course 37 years ago and, I agree, it's a classic

I agree with you about the first half of the book; but after that, it degenerates into a prolonged car-chase and the use of language seems much less careful.

I've never read it but have heard so much about it. Just bought it on Kindle. Thanks OP, I'm always looking for interesting things to read.

A brilliant, brilliant book.

Yeah I agree with you op
It's very well written. Maybe time for a re-read for me

It’s the most beautiful book in the English language in my opinion which is all the more impressive considering English was Nabokov’s third language. It’s horrifying yes but the prose is beautiful.

I am reading it now.

I found it horrifying when I first read it in my mid teens. It invokes a really strong response of revulsion in me but it is a classic for me. We need to talk about Kevin provoked a similar response but it wasn't as carefully composed as Lolita. Agree with the poster who said the first half is better than the second.

I found it slow.

I too agree. It is done a great disservice by the film, but I suppose portraying Lolita as a 12 year old would have mean the film couldn't have been made, and Kubrick was always a director who pushed boundaries.

Nabokov makes us feel uncomfrotable because, whilst we know that Humbert is beguiling us, we fall for his charms, we like the man whilst knowing his actions are disgusting. We fear that in ourselves, being duped by a monster... we know that many human monsters are also charmers, he fascinates us.

I also got the Poe references, I read him a lot and knew who he married, so it was a bit like being given an insight into his life too, or maybe just nderstadning that Annabel Lee wasn't a 'pure' love stiry either.

I haven't read Lolita in years, I may look out a copy, see what I think now.

It's a lovely book. It's been my favourite novel since I was 12; I also like Nabokov's "Ada" a lot.
I don't think much of either of the Lolita films, though, mostly as both Lolita's are far too old (though I do like Dominique Swain in the later film)

Rogue apostrophe in my last post!

It is literally a modern classic, regardless of whether you like it or not.

I read it in 2004 for uni - have no desire to read it again tbh. I didn’t enjoy it enough to be compelled to read it again.

@IsadoraQuagmire what makes you call it ‘lovely’? I think that’s an odd description considering the content!

I thought it very good when I read it, but that was thirty years ago, probably due a re-read soon. I haven't seen any of the film versions though, so not tainted by any poor interpretations.

Well, normally I loathe books or films that contain anything resembling a love story, but I find this one madly romantic. I love Humbert too, though Lo is a horrible person.

I've never seen a film version, but the novel is, in every sense, ravishing. I remember pulling it down off a shelf in the school library and being instantly captivated. I can still recite the first chapter from memory.. the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth.

Criticising it because it deals with paedophilia is a crass and stupid response, but surely most people get that.

I read it first for the story, when I was a teenager and re read it recently and was absolutely blown away by the quality of the writing. It’s brilliant.

Lolita is insanely good. I agree that the first half seems better, but I think the different pace and tone of the second is necessary: Humbert is slowly stripped of all his pretensions, his dominance, his pathetic delusions that he's a romantic hero. He's just another lost, drunk wanderer. Even his arch-nemesis, who he imagines to be this Moriarty-type villain, turns out to be a disgusting, sordid man who dies a repulsive death. The real ending (IMO) is when you skip back to the Foreward and understand what that offhand reference to Grey Star means, and it's so simple and awful.

Having said all this, I did first read Lolita when I was thirteen and made a great tit of myself by telling anyone who'd listen that 'there isn't even any sex in it'. The whole thing went right over my head (probably for the best). I still don't get about 75% of the literary references.

I did first read Lolita when I was thirteen and made a great tit of myself by telling anyone who'd listen that 'there isn't even any sex in it'

sorry @Matcha, but teenage you has made my day.

Isodora - really? It's obvious to me that Humbert is not telling the story with any degree of accuracy. He tries to paint it as a love story where he was the spurned lover. When of course the reality was that he groomed and raped a child and her mother too. Lo had no choice and certainly no chance of being an equal partner. At best she had Stockholm syndrome.

Another one who likes this book. I The prose is phenomenal. And as someone who had an obsessive love as a teenager I kind of got it the first time I read it (I was 14) in a way I’m not sure I would now. I then read it again for my degree aged around 19 but haven’t since. I will have to dig it out.

Humbert is repellant but, as a PP said, sort of charming. You like him in spite of yourself.

Agree that both film versions aren’t great due to Lolita being a bit too old, but clearly they couldn’t have a 12yo in the role. I think Jeremy Irons does quite a good job of HH in the more recent version, he captures the slightly sweaty-handedness of the character well. He’s a bit gross.

I love this quotation from the start of the novel:

“Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita. Did she have a precursor? She did, indeed she did. In point of fact, there might have been no Lolita at all had I not loved, one summer, an initial girl-child. In a princedom by the sea. Oh when? About as many years before Lolita was born as my age was that summer. You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, exhibit number one is what the seraphs, the misinformed, simple, noble-winged seraphs, envied. Look at this tangle of thorns.”

No. It's superficially well written but it's a long apologia for paedophilia, full of self-pity and self-aggrandisement disguised as self-abasement. It wasn't the only story Nabokov wrote about sex with children, which would make you wonder.

It's the story of the grooming, rape and destruction of a child. Lolita runs away from her abuser and ends up dying in childbirth as a teenager. WTF is beautiful about that?

Hatred of women is so entrenched in our society that a book like Lolita can be regarded as a classic. You might as well praise Mein Kampf.

Isadora I am assuming that, like me, you read it literally the first time.

I re-read it after reading some of the reviews, as I was sure that my 13 year old self had missed some of the more 'adult?' meanings. Then I realised why I had been fascinated by it. It was definitely far more intense than I had first realised. That is when I started making more connections with Poe etc.

I am now wondering what I will make of it, post Saville, MeToo etc.