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.

JustGettingStarted

Having had a quick look, I don't think there is anything there a father of mine couldn't have inferred/discussed in order to incorporate it into his narrative. He isn't relying solely on imagination, but on experience.

Father of nine, not mine!

Well most people have experienced lust and obsession except Humbert's is directed towards children. 'Normal' people will have had those feelings usually but they won't have had them about children.

So you sure he's not getting his rocks off when writing lines like

• 'My moaning mouth, gentlemen of the jury, almost reached her bare neck, while I crushed out against her left buttock the last throb of the longest ecstasy man or monster had ever known' -

If he aint then, sure as hell some of his readers are getting their rocks off. But hey its so well written

Electrascoffee

We aren't going to agree on this. It is of course possible that I am wrong. I just don't think so.

Well I don't agree that someone who writes about a difficult subject must be dodgy. It's very uncomfortable to read - it's not romantic in the least. The brilliance lies in the thought provoking themes. Imo.

Surely the whole point of a great work of literature is that it can be created by someone who hasn't experienced those themes first hand. Everyone except Humbert knows what a monster he is.

Well I don't agree that someone who writes about a difficult subject must be dodgy

Nor do I. Where did I extrapolate outwards like this?

Thanks Electrascoffee for starting this, and CountessCon and others who made it so interesting. It wasn't on my reading list before, but it is now.

Ahem Pengggwn "I don't think you can write so convincingly about paedophilia without being at least dodgy."

GerdaLovesLili

If "Ahem" is the only thing you have to say, I have to confess, I have no idea what you're going on about.

You literally extrapolated from the tex, that an author dealing with a "difficult subject" must be dodgy. Those are your words. Cut and pasted from your post.

What makes paedophilia different from any other "difficult", illegal, viscerally unpleasant subject? Nothing.

GerdaLovesLili

I genuinely don't think you read well.

"I don't think you can write so convincingly about paedophilia without being at least dodgy."

There is no extrapolation to 'difficult subjects'. The comment refers to Nabokov's book and, by implication, to any other book where the author writes as convincingly about that specific subject.

Penggwyn, you are making yourself look a bit silly now. I think you need a lie down.

Your original post, "I don't think you can write so convincingly about paedophilia without being at least dodgy."

This was your question, "Nor do I. Where did I extrapolate outwards like this?"

This is your own answer, "The comment refers to Nabokov's book and, by implication, to any other book where the author writes as convincingly about that specific subject.".

I'm not sure how else to interpret what you've said. Can anyone else help me?

GerdaLovesLili

I don't think I can. You seem really confused even when reading plain English.

YOU are extrapolating out to other topics. Not me.

Responding to @Lethaldrizzle's point, I always imagined writers of erotic scenes would imagine the scene with someone they desired for the purposes of description/choreography, then transfer the description to the protagonists of the book.

I was quoting what you have written. In order. I was asking for someone else, rather than you, to explain what they thought you meant.

There is really no room for you to wriggle out of what you have said, and that is all I have quoted.

Hmmmm. Is anyone else going to defend Pengggwyn? Or are we all giving up and having a nice g&t?

GerdaLovesLili

In your case a third or fourth?

It’s a great book! Incredibly unsettling, the portrait of a monster as told by a monster.

The film is awful!

I read Lolita for the first time when I was 15 (so some 30 yrs ago) and have read it several times since. It is so, so, so, brilliant. Not least as it is so funny. It is one of the best books, ever. Full stop. Have never seen any films, but the book stands alone.

Both films are awful and yes I do think nabokov is a bit dodgy.

PurpleFlower1983, thinking about this, perhaps the subject of "Lolita" is just untransferable to film format. I am struggling to imagine how a film could say what the book said ... (you are right, the film is awful).

You have been very unpleasant on this thread Pengggwn

I take it you are not denying you posted

"I don't think you can write so convincingly about paedophilia without being at least dodgy."

So in your view Nabokov is dodgy?

You then posted

"The comment refers to Nabokov's book and, by implication, to any other book where the author writes as convincingly about that specific subject.".

Meaning that any other author who wrote convincingly about that subject must be equally as "dodgy" as Nabokov?

The pointless point scoring you are now doing is that Gerda is referring to other difficult subjects. You are correct - you only referred to that particular subject.

Why writing about that particular subject convincingly should be proof of being "dodgy" isn't clear. Valley McDermid writes so convincingly about stuff I can't bear to read about. Is she "dodgy"?

I think so much of the book's appeal lies in Nabokov's use of language that a film version is never going to be able to capture it. Strip away the quality of the narrative and you are left with a seduction and a road chase. I tried to watch one of the films, but got bored with it.