"A super-cute Lolita look"

[IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat]

here

Am I being prudish? Wear sandals with socks for a super-cute Lolita look? This is aimed at teenage girls!! Am I over-reacting or is this just wrong?

It's a New Zealand shop, BTW.

The Original Film with Lolita as a little siren

Whoops....bad link!

Try this link

It says that in the original film, Lolita was portrayed as 14.

That is what has entered the general consciousness - the idea of a sexually aware, well-developed 14 year old (above the age of consent in Spain) who in the film I believe does a good deal of the seducing (as she does in Humbert's mind).

Not the original, of a child who is only imagined as a temptress by a possibly-mentally-ill paedophile, who happens to be our narrator.

So, yeah, that's why people think it's ok to think of a "cute Lolita look", because they think they are talking about being youthful-yet-sexy, rather than talking about paedophilia.

Plus the Japanese are perverts.

Some people who claim to have read the book say that it's a "love-story" and Delores is this manipulative minx, but when I read it, I didn't get that at all: there were these horrific glimpses into the reality of it, like when Delores was ill with a fever and HH particularly enjoyed raping her [bleurgh]. I rather hope my reaction is the one Nabokov was trying to evoke.

I agree buzzsore.IMO those who take the narrator at his word are being a little naive.

I really want to read it again now actually. It is a very nice example of the unreliable narrator.

The Lolita look in Japan is worthy of some sort of thesis.

It's a total reaction to the male-dominated culture in the country.

I'm not sure if I want to admire it as something ironic and self-aware, something intended (subconsciously?) to force the Japanese public to question their own values - a sort of hyperbolic statement, IYSWIM, or something creepy, submissive and self-perpetuating.

The 60's film was by Stanley Kubrick, not Polanski. I haven't seen either of the movies, the reviews seemed to indicate they portrayed Lolita as a seducer or some how responsible for her treatment by Humbert rather than that aspect being his self-deception. I had no interest in watching that.

whatever the original intentions of Nabokov... I think it's pretty clear that men, the critics, the media love this book for the most unsavory reasons.
Yes, Nabokov is a poet and this is reflected in his language... but why is the politics behind the book ignored. If this never happened IRL then all the men who reckon Nabokov is being ironic in his humanization of Humbert and dehumanization of Lolita might have a point. If girls weren't dehumanized every single day in the very same way that Nabokov does, then I could see the art behind exploring the inner world of a paedophile.

But it's a bit of a wink wink nudge nudge book, from what I have seen in the writing of critics.

freerangeeggs "The Lolita look in Japan is worthy of some sort of thesis.

It's a total reaction to the male-dominated culture in the country.

I'm not sure if I want to admire it as something ironic and self-aware, something intended (subconsciously?) to force the Japanese public to question their own values - a sort of hyperbolic statement, IYSWIM, or something creepy, submissive and self-perpetuating."

What you said here was fascinating! Could you elaborate. It could be a reaction to that, couldn't it. Japanese women refusing to have children is definitely a reaction to their status in society... and motherhood is as far away from the Lolita look as you can get...
But all I know is that I would feel ill if my daughter started dressing like that... even if it was a statement. Then again... if she was doing it as a kind of fuck you to society, I would feel a lot better than if she became a slavish housewife.

I read Lolita at uni and was so innocent (at 18) that it simply baffled me. Now I have a pre-teen d and it's pretty scary.
But, re ankle socks and sandals, what's the problem? It used to be common to see grown women in ankle socks and "summer shoes". It's a very comfortable way to dress, especially if you have sensitive feet and/or it's not quite warm enough for bare feet in sandals (we have cool summers where I live). It annoys me that it has been 'sexualised' in this stupid way. Not sure when this happened but suspect some time in the eighties. By the early nineties, first hubby would scowl and walk out of the room if I wore ankle socks at all, regardless of the shoe, yet I had always done this, and so had his mother. Very weird.

I'm not sure if I want to admire it as something ironic and self-aware, something intended (subconsciously?) to force the Japanese public to question their own values...

freeraneeggs You put that so well....it crystalises my own feelings....but what's this about Japanese women refusing the have children?

sAfly, I think you're right. Trouble is, the bloody men fall for it! And women! We're a crazy species.

[[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxPGnWiLFfo&has_verified=1&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fverify_age%3Fnext_url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253DcxPGnWiLFfo%26hl%3Den-GB We are human beings not machines they tell you when asked why they're not having children.

50% of Japanese women over 30 are childless, and Japan will soon face the sharpest population drop in the history of civilization..
Their second class status is the reason why they're "opting out".. so what do you think the politicians are doing? Trying to alter the status quo and liberate women? Nope... ROBOTS are being developed to take the place of the children that would have been born. The lack of children is going to devastate the GDP in years to come and mothers receive huge wads of cash every 4 months to help them with their kids..

BUt men would choose extinction over women's liberation any day.

here's the real link

the whole Japanese Lolita comments reminded me of this disgusting music video used to be on Music channels all the time like last year, the

warning its a bit sick singer looks like a kid

I find "The Sort of Thing that Can Happen to Any Man" statement odd, as HH's attraction to young girls is quite particular. Not only must they be young, but they must be very similar in looks to his first love (who he kissed as a boy), who died.

I agree all references to "Lolita-style" are based on the film (the old black and white one) rather than Nabokov's description. HH's views on Dolores' mother was the first time I realised that men would target women with a view of abusing their kids.

That movie was directed by Stanley Kubrick.

I haven't read Lolita since I was in my teens and all I remember now is being very squirrely about the male-gazey aspect of it. I didn't get what it was at the time, it is only now that I can put a label on that feeling. All I knew then was that it was not a book aimed for me, it was about me, or at least about a girl my age. I have been in no hurry to re-read it as an adult, but perhaps I should. I have been re-reading lots of my teen books (1984, Catcher in the Rye, To Kill A Mockingbird, Flowers in the Attic ())

I am a bit raw about the older men/young teens thing as I have an unresolved situation with two older friends of mine who have taken umbrage at my reaction to a (to them) light hearted sexualised comment about schoolgirls.

The original movie was by Stanley Kubrick. My understanding is that he wasn't allowed to use a younger child - in fact having a 14 year old was a big deal at the time. Humbert is portrayed as a very disturbed and delusional man, but in a lot of ways it's more about the interplay between him and the Peter Sellers character and Lolita is almost a secondary character (although I don't personally think she is primarily a seductress, more a confused and unhappy child) . I've not read the original book, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were quite different. I also doubt that many people have seen the film either. It's certainly not titillating, although I got the impression that the remake might well have been.

Dione
"I find "The Sort of Thing that Can Happen to Any Man" statement odd

Most women do, Dione. it was a male judge that uttered those words about a sex offender. Men know better than women what goes on in mens's heads. Men know that most of them rape, one of the main justifications for prostitution was so that men wouldn't go around raping "ordinary" women. (prostitutes can't be raped, of course )

ANyway, my point is that men persistently drop hints about the sexuality of men. CHild sexual abuse was and is, frighteningly common.
In fact , how many men don't do it simply because the opportunity never arises, or because they might get caught?

WOmen, in their innocence, just don't want to believe it even when men are telling them