Monday, 1 November 2010

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

This is a book whose reputation precedes it, so of course I wanted to read it.  It caused outrage when published and has never been far from controversy.

Synopsis: Humbert Humbert has a preoccupation with "nympets", pre-teenage girls.  After marrying her mother and a lot of plotting, he abducts and abuses his step-daughter Lolita.  All told from Humbert's perspective.

Score: 4 out of 5

Given the subject matter, this could easily have been a sleazy read, one to make you uncomfortable.  But part of Nabokov's talent is that it isn't.  He treads a fine line between making Humbert seem human and making his crimes excusable, which must have been tricky. 

Although his crimes are at no point glorified or made to seem acceptable, Nabokov slowly makes you relate to Humbert so that in the end, you catch yourself feeling almost sympathetic to him and then feel horrible for it.  Humbert's excuses that Lolita was not innocent and that she seduced him go through the whole book and are almost believable until you catch the glimpses of Lolita that the writer allows to slip through whilst Humbert is asleep or unwell - Lolita crying herself to sleep every night, Lolita desperately trying to catch the attention of others and escape.

The book was well written and easy to read.  You would never have guessed that Nabokov was not a native English speaker.  There are lots of allusions to classics and the language is rich and poetic without being stuffy.  The sentences are long and winding, so although I found it easy to read it's one to read slowly rather than rush through.

I did feel that the book lost steam about two thirds of the way in though.  I found it hard to keep up with Humbert's paranoia (which took up a lot of lines) and found the part about who helped Lolita finally escape long and a bit tiresome. I did enjoy the ending though, where Lolita was finally able to confront Humbert many years later.

Have you read Lolita?
What did you think?

20 comments:

  1. I have never read Lolita and after watching about half of the film (and feeling absolutely sickened) I don't think I ever will.
    Very interesting to hear what it's about though and that it's not as bad as it could be

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've never read Lolita and I'm not sure I want to read it, especially now that I have a little girl of my own.

    Excellent review though, I twitted it to my following.

    http://www.ManOfLaBook.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had the courage to email Bloomsbury to ask for an ARC of Cate of the Lost Colony a while ago and even though it turned out it is not published in the UK, they added me to their mailing list and kindly sent me out a package of review books including The Goose Girl.
    They welcome new UK reviewers as there aren't that many of us so I wouldn't be afraid to email them introducing yourself and your blog. The lady who deals with review copies is lovely :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. I completely agree with your point about Lolitas voice coming through completely twisting what we have learnt from Humbert about her, I do find that some readers miss this and ust see her as a seductres

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aside from The Fool's Progress by Edward Abbey it is one of the best "American road trip" novels I've ever read. I love this book. You should read Pale Fire if you haven't. It's his best work, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nabokov is pure genius. I haven't read enough of his books, but I plan to read them all. I agree with Ken (above) that Pale Fire is the best. It is brilliant. Pnin is also great and very charming.

    Lolita can be difficult. For one thing, I missed most of the references, even with the annotated version. But the subject matter is rough. I've read that Lolita is a metaphor for art -- a lust for fresh ideas and literary perfection. But I'd have to re-read it with that idea in mind to appreciate it.

    Rose City Reader.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Nabokov slowly makes you relate to Humbert so that in the end, you catch yourself feeling almost sympathetic to him and then feel horrible for it."

    YES!!!!!!!!!!!! That's exactly how I felt when I read Lolita. Granted, it's been almost ten years now, but in the whole book, that's what I remember most. Great review!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I read Pale Fire for the first time last month-I read Lolita many years ago-Pale Fire is just a great work on many levels-it would be a good choice for a group read-I am now a follower of your blog

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with everything you stated here. However, I could NOT make it through the rants, and the content was just too disturbing for me. I stopped over halfway through and can honestly say I'll probably never attempt it again. Great review!

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Jessica
    I think this part was the cleverst of the book & completely agree with you. Humbert wanted her to be a seductress, but Nabokov lets us see little glimpses that she really isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Nabokov focuses on the perversion of the human mind. He tries to understand it, explain the horrors of the human nature. What looks normal on the outside can be rotten on the inside. I didn't love this book, or like it for that matter. But it is a classic. Don't we have the same things going on right now? Don't we all have dark deep desires that we know we will never forfill, but we still harbor them? Humbert, because of the traumatic experiences of his life and mental illness, has only one difference from us-instead of burying his fantasies deep, he brought them to life.
    Orhedea @ Bergamotbook.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Nabokov slowly makes you relate to Humbert so that in the end, you catch yourself feeling almost sympathetic to him and then feel horrible for it." - I felt exactly the same. I was thinking, no no this is not right, something must be wrong with me! How can I feel for Humbert?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nabokov, is just one of a few writers that everyone agrees is a genius. His ability with language was pure poetry. Even with a character you would never entertain an empathy for(I have 9yr old daughter) he can create a connection with that has your sympathy.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have always shied away from reading this one...thought it would be too disturbing, but your review has me intrigued, honestly...

    Just found your blog, and I think it is terrific :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. I need to read it again, I think. I remember thinking when I read it years ago that it strangely DID seem excusable. Nabokov is certainly a tremendous talent. The reason I think I should read it again is that I don't recall the glimpses of Lolita very well - I was left with the impression that she kind of was into it. I think I read it too young to form a proper impression.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I just can't read it! I've tried twice and given up both times. It's not me being squeamish or anything, there's just something about Nabokov that I can't get on board with. I also tried (and failed at) Pale Fire. I think I'll give Lolita one more shot and if it doesn't work then we shall part ways forever. I just don't know what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. One of the things that I love about Nabokov is that he uses unreliable narrators to make his readers think. You have to look past Humbert's descriptions to realize what is actually going on. As a whole, I thought that Lolita was good, but Pale Fire is so much better...

    ReplyDelete
  19. I love it! I love it! I love it!
    I love dear old Humbert's twisted mind. ^^
    It should have been 5 out of 5.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Didn't like this book. Mostly because I didn't get most of the references in the book and I must say that it was above my height language wise. It makes me even more impressed that Nabokov wrote in english because I can relate to not being english and there is no way I would be able to write that well. So I could see that it was well written but I got lost between Humbert's thoughts and the references + the length + the theme of the book that I couldn't get over with. Maybe later I will read it again, in french this time to understand all the subtilities of the prose...

    ReplyDelete