Lolita

Rating:
Summary: Irons's reading brings much to this wonderful book
Review: I had already read the book "Lolita" and seen both versions of the movie when I stumbled across this set of tapes. Because I thought Jeremy Irons had done a very creditable Humbert Humbert, I decided to give the book on tape a chance as well.

This recording far exceeded my expectations. Irons's reading is flawless, simply flawless, and hearing Nabokov's prose read aloud made me realize that, as wonderful as the book is, a reader cannot fully appreciate it until s/he has actually listened to it being read. I never thought this could happen, but by the time I'd finished listening to the tapes I firmly believed that this book on tape was BETTER than the book on paper. Not a word had been altered, but the literature was made even richer for being spoken.

Rating:
Summary: Another kind of joy
Review: The fear and loathing with which some inevitably approach this novel cannot be allayed, nor should it be. Nabokov chose his subject as carefully as he chose his words, and the primary intrigue of Lolita on a bookshelf or website is a "road-kill" one - the vague thoughts and comments we have heard before suddenly come filtering back to this focal point of controversy, a novel about paeodophilia. One which we cannot help but stare at; one which I, at least, had hesitations about picking up and purchasing.

But I have a suspicion that as far as the subject itself is concerned, Nabokov had very little interest beyond the most superficial. He does not seek to address the ethical questions which raise themselves with such a topic. Rather, he uses a controversial story as a medium through which to convey his true purpose - joy in a language not his own, and a deep love for the complexity of the weak inner person balanced with the strong outer individual. Whereas most writers use language and character development as media through which to tell a story, Nabokov works the other way round.

This sense came to me towards the end of the novel. I had struggled - the writing resembles the progress of a very long river, at times torrent-like, at times threatening to dry up completely. Similes fly by at absurd points; short, comprehensible sentences follow impossible and insane ones, forcing you to keep moving even if you haven't a clue what happened. It is a mood piece: the novel as a piece of canvas with far too much information to absorb point for point, step to step.

Hence, the writing is disjointed temporally, with flashbacks interrupting what in other novels might be called the flow of the story. Brief glimpses of the contemptible, villainous, valiant protagonist Humbert Humbert mask the true genius of the writing - that our hero lies (exists...but also deceives?) in every word. Self-description is deceptive, and yet so masterfully that you cannot immediately understand the implications of this, even though you know from the start the narrator's condition and some of his history.

For me, the moment of "realisation" - what was really a combination of rapture and panic - came with four simple words. A simile, stating that the sun was "like a burning man". Until then, I had doubted the value of the piece, which felt too fragmented...I was struggling to get the sense of what was happening, and this made me less interested than I was sure I should have been. And suddenly that phrase - not overly significant in itself. But, there was such an absurd simplicity, a sheer poetry that communicated more in four words than four novels could do about the situation at that moment, the character, psychology of the individual, the nature of words themselves, language...you get the idea. It froze me, and in the fashion of the best literature, taught me about myself as a human being tied inextricably to the mad, bad Humbert Humbert.

Allegory is present throughout this work - but don't waste your time trying to wrench meaning out of the paedophilia scenario. That is real, and is exactly what Nabokov meant to write about. Rather, the allegory lies in the words themselves, in the language, and the character of a disturbing (not least because he is occasionally disturbingly reassuring) lawless man.

And, Lolita also works as one paradigm for something not yet mentioned, love. It is a soul-wrenching book, and I recommend it tentatively, for it is not for all, but with complete satisfaction.

Rating:
Summary: read it with a dictionary!
Review: i had a love hate relationship with this book. i devoured the first 2/3 of it, then the last part would *not end* i was very dissapointed about the direction the story took towards the ending, it just seemed so silly. however, i picked it up again a year later when i was trying to build my vocabulary. if nothing else, read it for the great words you can extract from it, and impress your friends!

Rating:
Summary: very interesting
Review: This novel is definately a masterpiece. It truly made me feel sorry for pedaphiles because they are so sick in the head. In the end my heart went out to Humbert for his loss of his one true love.

Rating:
Summary: Such lyricism
Review: This book IS a work of art. How can a man born and raised in Europe have such control over the harsh English language; how can he write better than most of us born into the language? How can he write things like a Monet painting: brilliant, bold, lively. To get aesthetic over the book would be typical, but how can you not? If not for the educated Humbert, what would this book mean? "Lolita" is about the obsession Humbert harbors for his step-daughter, Dolores Haze, and their cross-country trek, and exploration of Humbert's love for Lo, to what extremes he would go to keep her. Some may get disgusted that it is about pedophilia, but Humbert makes it seem like true love. I highly recommend this masterpiece.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant, but read this review for a very important warning
Review: First, a warning to everyone who is just picking up this book for the first time:

If you do not speak French, BUY THE ANNOTATED EDITION. In addition to the informative introduction, it is full of insightful commentary, but, most importantly, it translates the hundreds (thousands?) of French words and phrases found in this book. I do not recommend attempting to read this book using a dictionary, as many of the expressions used are slang. In addition to using French expressions, Nabokov also employs words that are, for all intents and purposes, dead; alludes to obscure (and not-so-obscure, but one won't need help with the latter) literary works; and invents books and expressions.

A good example of this can be found very early in the book, when Nabokov mentions a book entitled "La Beaute Humaine," by Pichon. Clearly, even if one doesn't speak french, one can assume that "La Beaute Humaine" means something to the effect of "The Human Beauty." This assumption is correct. The annotation, however, reveals that this book is a joke, of sorts. Nabokov invented this volume, and the author's name, "Pichon," is a play on the French word for breast, "Nichon."

Such obscure wordplay occurs throughout the book, and is quite satisfying and often funny on the rare occasion that one "gets the joke." While the annotated version is helpful -- and at times invaluable for such references -- it also reveals key plot details, a significant caveat.

Rating:
Summary: Language as a whore?
Review: I've just read Lolita for the first time and thought it astonishing. Child abuse is the vilest act any of us can imagine yet Nabokov makes his narrator the most eloquent in the canon.He leaves traces everywhere of the true nature of the abuse so we can "see through" Humbert, even if he refuses(most of the time) to see his true nature. But if someone can use language to mount a defence of the sexual abuse of achild ,in effect constuct an idealology, where does that leave other ideals? I live in Northern Ireland so this has a particular resonance for me, day and daily for the past 30 years here we have listened to people defending the indefensible, to the point where one wonders is there such a thing as morality or is all just a clever use of language?

Rating:
Summary: -
Review: Not too bad, but I think it's placee on he greatest of the english language list is a bit stretched. Nabokov has an excellent command of the language, which in itself makes the book worth reading. But the story itself didn't live up to the hype. I just didn't care what happened, and this came dangerously close to being one of those books one just never finishes because of a lack of caring.

Rating:
Summary: Lo. Lee. Ta.
Review: This is the story of the infamous infactuation between a middle aged Humbert Humbert with his 12 year-old stepdaughter, Lolita Haze. The subject of the novel, a man's obsession with pre-pubescent girls, is by no means easy to read. It's like hearing about similar stories to this on the evening news. But Humbert is the narrator giving his side from his mentally sick point of view. Being only slightly familiar with the story, i was aware that Lolita did flirt with Humbert and give in to his desires, but until i read the book, i did not know that Lolita allowed herself to show some fragility. Though she bragged about previous sexual experiences to Humbert before he got to have his way with her, Lolita was still a child and a girl who was exposed to a man's hunger far too soon. When Humbert describes Lolita staring sadly into the bathroom mirror of some hotel, unaware that he is staring at her, he recognizes that Lolita would have traded ANYTHING in place of their incestual (sp) relationship. I have no sympathy for the character Humbert, or for any pedophiles in the real world, but the writing, dialogue, and descriptions of this novel are far too brilliant. Though an extremely easy man to want to strangle to pieces, Humbert is a fascinating character & Lolita's antics and confusion have the power to bewilder and sadden you at the same time.

Rating:
Summary: An interesting concept.
Review: This book gives a much more realistic, believable look into themindset of a pedophile than I expected it to; that's the good news,along with the fact that its reputation for salaciousness is vastlyoverrated. By modern standards, the descriptions of the sex act areminimal and downright reserved.

HOWEVER, the writing style, solauded by so many reviewers, is not "sensual","gorgeous", and "passionate". It is simplyoverdone. Have you ever heard of Edward George Bulwer-Lytton? He isthe Victorian author whose novel began "It was a dark and stormynight...", a beginning that has become a byword for bad, overdonewriting, to the point that Scott Rice of San Jose State Universityholds an annual contest to see who can intentionally write the mostBulwer-Lyttonesque opening sentence, the opening to the worst of allpossible novels. Many of the passages in this book remind me ofentries in that contest; let's try a few examples at random:

As shestrained to chuck the core of her abolished apple into the fender, heryoung weight, her shameless innocent shanks and round bottom, shiftedin my tense, tortured, surreptitiously laboring lap; and all of asudden a mysterious change came over my senses.

Or how about:

Thechild therapist in me (a fake, as most of them are -- but no matter)regurgitated neo-Freudian hash and conjured up a dreaming andexaggerating Dolly in the "latency" period ofgirlhood. Finally, the sensualist in me (a great and insane monster)had no objection to some depravity in his prey. But somewhere behindthe raging bliss, bewildered shadows conferred -- and not to haveheeded them, this is what I regret! Human beings, attend! I shouldhave understood that Lolita had ALREADY proved to be something quitedifferent from innocent Annabel, and that the nymphean evil breathingthrough every pore of the fey child that I had prepared for my secretdelectation, would make the secrecy impossible, and the delectationlethal.

As I say, these are simply passages taken almost at random:open to a random page, and look for a suitably overblown descripionnestled in a suitably complex sentence. I doubt that any page in thebook would fail to yield some such bit of purple prose.

If you likethat sort of thing, this book is certainly for you. If you prefer yourdescriptions consise rather than elaborate, and your sentence structureno more convoluted than necessary, or prefer to find your verbs in thefirst twenty words or so of the sentence, you will find this book hardgoing. Also, if you don't read French, there will be frequent asidesthat will be meaningless to you; the main character, being French,periodically lapses into his native tongue for a sentence of two, andno translation is ever given the reader.