Lolita

Rating:
Summary: A work of art
Review: Nabokov's "Lolita", without a doubt, is among the most penetrating and beautiful novels ever written. Nabokov's prose is sublime, which is all the more amazing given that English was not his mother tongue. He delves straight into the mind and heart of the enigmatic Humbert Humbert, stripping the anti-hero's soul bare for all to see. Perhaps only in Dostoyevsky's Raskolnikov have the inner workings of a criminal's mind been so thoroughly explored.

Some people have objected to Nabokov having even dared to mention Humbert's crime. But do these people object to depictions of Raskolnikov's awful deed? What scale does one use to weigh pedophilia vs murder? Humbert's crimes were not described in detail, and often merely alluded to. They are not condoned, or glorified in any way. To propose that merely describing a hideous crime is grounds for censorship (as was often done when this novel was first published) would imply that many of our greatest novels would be banned. Did not Cain kill Abel? Did not Achilles dishonour Hector's corpse after he was brutally slain? Did not a jealous Othello murder his own lover? Yet does anyone seriously propose banning the Bible, Homer, and Shakespeare?

Simply put, this book is a masterpeice at all levels. It may very well be the most beautiful prose written in the last century. It's story is deep, penetrating, and moving. It is loaded with allusion and metaphor, and leave no doubt as to its author's artistic and linguistic abilities. A great, albiet challenging, read.

Rating:
Summary: The greatest book ever written.
Review: This book was not written by a pedophile, nor does it condone or glorify pedophilia. To the contrary, Nabakov (the writer, not the pedphile)portrays Humbert (the pedophile)as a sympathetic fool.

Rating:
Summary: Nabakov's Artistry
Review: Put the pedophilia to the side for a moment. After reading the first paragraph of Lolita, many will find themselves drawn into the novel for its literary value alone. This paragraph is truly a work of beauty, and as Humbert continues to relate his tale, the beauty of the novel never fades.

Nabokov, who is well-known for his artistic flair, outdoes himself in this novel. Match this with the controversial topic, and you have a masterpiece that will never disappear from the reading lists of scholars. Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment effectively puts the reader in the mind of the troubled Raskolnikov and makes the reader feel compassion for his troubled soul. Nabokov takes this technique a step further. He forces the reader into the mind of Humbert and demands that you do not feel compassion. Everytime it seems like there is a chance for the reader to accept Humbert, he takes things one step further.

Not everyone will be able to forget about the controversy, but if one could just read through the first paragraph, then he/she will be hooked by its beauty.

Rating:
Summary: Lolita, light of my eyes...
Review: This is the wonderful "autobiographic" account of Humbert Humbert's passion for Lolita, a 12-year-old girl. Humbert is an excentric middle-aged European emigré to America, who rents an appartment at a boarding house and falls desperately in love with the beautiful daughter of the widow owner. He devises a plot to be able to live close to the object of his obsession, and then Fate makes a trick. This will make Humbert travel around the United States with her, fulfilling his sexual fantasies. No good will come out of this slippery slope, but the plot is not the most important thing about the book.

What's remarkable is not that the book tells such perverted facts, but the way in which Nabokov almost convinces the reader that the affair is legitimate and desirable. The reader comes to wish that Humbert gets what he lusts after, even if reason keeps reminding us that something is very wrong in the sexual relations between a grown man and a child. Beyond that, the form of the book -its literature- is the subject. It is a perfect mix of fine irony and infinite and desperate tenderness. The metaphors Nabokov uses are practically insuperable. It is a disconcerting, unforgettable and lovable novel. Every paragraph has an intrinsec beauty to it, that you'll find yourself rereading many of them. It is a book to be rejoiced in, to marvel at the power of words to create, recreate and leave the reader in total awe. All the praise this novel has commanded is justified; all attacks on its subject are unjustified. However distorted and reprehensible, Humbert's love for Lolita is absolut. The narration, in the form of a self-defense addressed to the jury, made me feel so happy about not being part of it: I would have acquitted the defendant, even if I knew he was guilty. Such is the power and mastery of Nabokov's literature. Don't be ashamed of falling in love with Lolita: you are perfectly justified and it's only a book, but, like they say on TV shows: don't try this at home.

Rating:
Summary: An English Masterpiece by a Russian Master?
Review: It's a shame that Nabokov's Lolita is known more for its prurient content than its remarkable artistry. I doubt anyone would argue that Humbert is anything but a monster yet somehow that gets lost in discussion of the book.

Nabokov delights his reader with linguistic acrobatics that would be amazing even from a writer whose native tongue was English. As it stands here, his puns, scholarly references, and command on the nuances of the language simply astound. The way he lays out the book almost has it folding in upon itself. He forces you to consider the perspective of any situation and toys with you to see just how perceptive a reader you are. Furthermore, he creates some of the most vivid and fully realized characters in literature. In fact, you might even find yourself feeling a bit melancholy about the fate of Humbert even if you done nothing but loathe him for 90% of the book.

Lolita is clearly on of the most astounding pieces of fiction of the 20th century and of all time. Now if more people could just grow up and read it...

Rating:
Summary: A main charachter who is helpless...
Review: The taint that Lolita carries is understandable, but not justified. There is more sexually charged writting on the fronts of checkout stand magazines. I have never met a librarian who has read Lolita, but it is not avalible at the local library because its "pornagraphic". I am sympathetic with the sexuality of the 12 year old girl, I was just that kind of kid. There is so much power in being young and desirable, men will do anything for you. Adults tend to forget or ignore the sexuality of young people, but it is there. The most facinating aspect of Lolita for me was Humbert's fall. He knows what he is doing is wrong, he constantally says he is aware what the public thinks, and yet he is unable to help himself. I was very uncomfortable with this reminder of our failings. Humbert is terrified of what he is doing, he is painfully and grossley manipulated by Lolita, and yet can not help or stop himself. This could be the story of any relationship, men, women, drugs, money. I would like to read the annoted eddition for a new perspective on the slippery slope of sin, Lolita.

Rating:
Summary: Shallow Readings
Review: Nabokov was not in the least interested in any of these silly moral issues. It is a work of literature, of art. Either it was well written or it wasn't. In this case, it was written brilliantly by a brilliant artist. Forget the story, read the words, the poetry of those words, and see how the English language can be used by a master. As Nabokov himself said, the country (any country) is populated by a horde of C-minuses and very few people are capable of appreciating art or anything of beauty. There are two types of literature: Good and Bad. This is the former and most are the latter.

Rating:
Summary: Am I the Only One Who Didn't Think Much Of this Book?
Review: This rarely happens. Usually when I rate a work, I'm usually with "the crowd." However, with Nabokov's book, I must make the exception. I really thought "Lolita," next to "American Psycho," was probably one of the most over-rated novels I have ever read in my life. As I read the overly emotional reviews here at Amazon, I have to wonder if these people read the same book I did. I'm not sure. Is "Lolita" an okay book? Sure. Can Nabokov write? Of course he can-- I found many of the satirical passages in the book funny. But, my God-- is his book a masterpiece, even an incredible work exploring the depths of pedophilia? Absolutely not. In fact, THAT was my biggest major disappointment with this novel. Nabokov, although, he tries, doesn't even come close to exploring pedophilia and the many questions it raises. This was what I hoped I would get from reading "Lolita"-- not only a fascinating story, but a deep psychological treatment of a man's "love" (at least in his mind) for a twelve year old girl. But as it were, Nabokov never does this, and his "masterpiece" comes across more as silly than anything else. I also found the character of Quilty, as someone else here at Amazon pointed out, a bit unnecessary and maybe even tacked on to try to finish out the rest of the novel.

I'm also astounded by the several people here who have declared "Lolita" a love story! For one, in the case of pedophilia, there is only one person in love, and that is the "molester." But secondly, doesn't the ending involving Quilty pretty much confirm that the only person loving anybody in this relationship was Humbert Humbert? Perhaps we can call this novel a tragic story of unrequited love, but for the love of God, let's not call it a "tragic love story!" Romeo and Juliet, Tristan and Isolde-- these are tragic love stories. But Lolita is clearly not one.

Perhaps I will one day read the annotated edition of this novel and maybe even watch Jeremy Irons' filmed version so that I can understand its current appeal. But until I do, I'm sorry-- I cannot recommend this book. There were several dull stretches throughout, the ending was just ridiculous, and the novel lacked the intense psychological depth required of this subject matter. All in all, this book was a major let-down for me.

Rating:
Summary: Run Lola Run
Review: The novel's scandal-tinted history and its subject--the affair between a middle-aged sexual pervert and a twelve-year-old girl--inevitably conjure up expectations of pornography. But there is not a single obscene term in Lolita, and aficionados of erotica are likely to find it a dud. Lolita blazes, however, with a perversity of a most original kind. For Mr. Nabokov has distilled from his shocking material hundred-proof intellectual farce. His book is slightly reminiscent of Thomas Mann's Confessions of Felix Krull; but Lolita has a stronger charge of comic genius and is more brilliantly written. Mr. Nabokov has few living equals as a virtuoso in the handling of the English language. But above all Lolita seems to me an assertion of the power of the comic spirit to wrest delight and truth from the most outlandish materials. It is one of the funniest serious novels I have ever read; and the vision of its abominable hero, who never deludes or excuses himself, brings into grotesque relief the cant, the vulgarity, and the hypocritical conventions that pervade the human comedy.

Rating:
Summary: Nabokov is my rock star idol
Review: One of the best questions to ask a writer is, "If you could wish to have written any book, which one would it be?" For me, it's Lolita. Good God. I started crying on the first page. Right about here: "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." This is definitely a novel for those who don't appreciate the literary acrobatics of Ada or Pale Fire. There are few brainy gimmicks, and the genius is in the breathtaking prose.