Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
Like The Zone of Interest, a reminder of the banality of evil.
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
To get through this book is morally challenging in a way I’ve never experienced with literature. The writing is rich and gorgeous, yet the content became disturbing at times. To write such a complex novel is truly a gift and I will be left thinking about this text for quite some time.
challenging
dark
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Beautiful writing for such disturbing concept. Plot got jumbly and slow about 2/3 in, but very glad I read it. Not sure if/when I’ll be able to reread it and put myself through that again.
objectively this is a good book, however it completely fried my brain and almost put me into a lifelong reading slump, so i will sleep very peacefully tonight knowing that i never have to read it ever again.
dark
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I finished Lolita a week ago, and am still searching for the words to describe the series of emotions this book has made me feel. I have attempted to express myself, and have failed time and time again, so forgive me if I'm all over the place.
First off, I did not find this book to be a page-turner. It wasn't particularly gripping, and it didn't motivate me to keep reading until the last quarter of the book. The pace is somewhat slow, but each (seemingly) mundane detail is significant in it's own way. This isn't to say that I disliked it whatsoever. Nabokov is an incredible writer, and his use of wordplay is wonderfully clever. I found myself laughing out loud on numerous occasions due to the diction.
I find a sort of odd enjoyment in knowing that other people were as emotionally conflicted as I was/am/will always be about this book. Only 70 pages in, I went on a long rant about my disgust towards H.H., but the character development is so incredible that it's impossible for one's feelings to continue on unwavering. To the best of my memory, I haven't read of such complex nonfictional characters in the past. The detail Nabokov goes into makes you feel as if you know H.H. and Lolita personally, or you're in the backseat riding with them riding across the country, or maybe even a visitor in the same hotel.
I didn't intend on writing a review, because I knew it would turn out very poorly written, but it feels so necessary. There is a reason why it's a classic. There is a reason why it's controversial. I recommend putting all of your preconceived judgements aside, and approaching this book with a clear mind. It will really take you on a journey.
P.s. Don't be like me and skip out on the prologue. It's important, and you should most definitely read it.
First off, I did not find this book to be a page-turner. It wasn't particularly gripping, and it didn't motivate me to keep reading until the last quarter of the book. The pace is somewhat slow, but each (seemingly) mundane detail is significant in it's own way. This isn't to say that I disliked it whatsoever. Nabokov is an incredible writer, and his use of wordplay is wonderfully clever. I found myself laughing out loud on numerous occasions due to the diction.
I find a sort of odd enjoyment in knowing that other people were as emotionally conflicted as I was/am/will always be about this book. Only 70 pages in, I went on a long rant about my disgust towards H.H., but the character development is so incredible that it's impossible for one's feelings to continue on unwavering. To the best of my memory, I haven't read of such complex nonfictional characters in the past. The detail Nabokov goes into makes you feel as if you know H.H. and Lolita personally, or you're in the backseat riding with them riding across the country, or maybe even a visitor in the same hotel.
I didn't intend on writing a review, because I knew it would turn out very poorly written, but it feels so necessary. There is a reason why it's a classic. There is a reason why it's controversial. I recommend putting all of your preconceived judgements aside, and approaching this book with a clear mind. It will really take you on a journey.
P.s. Don't be like me and skip out on the prologue. It's important, and you should most definitely read it.
challenging
dark
funny
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
“I knew I had fallen in love with Lolita forever; but I also knew that she would not be forever Lolita.” — Vladimir Nabokov, Lolita
I don’t know if I’ve read any book in the past two years that tested me the way Lolita did. I’ve put off reading Lolita for years, because I couldn’t deal with the subject matter. Last year, I picked it up in a bookstore and read the first page and Nabokov’s style mesmerized me. It was another couple of months until I bought it, and another month still before I started reading. I have finished quite a number of books while continuing Lolita, mainly because I couldn’t read more than a few pages at a time. I also didn’t want to put it down and lose Nabokov’s incredible words.
“Teachers of Literature are apt to think up such problems as “What is the author’s purpose?” or still worse “What is the guy trying to say?” Now, I happen to be the kind of author who in starting to work on a book has no other purpose than to get rid of that book and who, when asked to explain its origin and growth, has to rely on such ancient terms as Interreaction of Inspiration and Combination — which, I admit, sounds like a conjurer explaining one trick by performing another.” — Vladimir Nabokov
I found the little afterword by Nabokov very enlightening. It’s a welcome look into the writer’s mind. Everyone knows what Lolita is about. I don’t have to summarize it. What I’m trying to grapple with are my thoughts on the book and how it made me feel.
I’m sure everyone is disturbed by pedophiles. But the idea especially disturbed me, from a young age. Think about it — how many children of 12 or 13 watch movies nowadays and fantasize or admire men in their late 30’s or 40’s? I remember the jolt I got when I realized that Brad Pitt was my mother’s age. I was about fifteen, I think. When viewed in respect to things like this Lolita is even more frightening. That’s where Nabokov came from, as well. Humbert describes himself as a handsome man bearing a striking resemblance to an actor Dolores (Lolita) admires.
“I am neither a reader nor a writer of didactic fiction, and, despite John Ray’s assertion, Lolita has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only insofar as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss, that is a sense of being somehow, somewhere, connectd with other states of being where art (curiosity, tenderness, kindness, ecstasy) is the norm. There are not many such books. All the rest is either topical trash or what some call the Literature of Ideas, which very often is topical trash coming in huge blocks of plaster that are carefully transmitted from age to age until somebody comes along with a hammar and takes a good crack at Balzac, at Gorki, at Mann.” — Vladimir Nabokov
On some level, that’s one of the things that makes Lolita such a jarring novel — you read it, and you cannot find a moral string to tie everything up neatly. And it is definitely, definitely true that reading Lolita is succumbing to aesthetic bliss.
“After Olympia Press, in Paris, published the book, an American critic suggested that Lolita was the record of my love affair with the romantic novel. The substitution of “english language” for “romantic novel” would make this elegant formula more correct.” — Vladimir Nabokov
I would not have read this novel had it not been for Nabokov’s irresistible mastery of the English language. You may dispute this, but in my mind I don’t know if I have ever read a writer more talented, or one whose style is so exquisite. There are many, many instances when I just sat, open-mouthed, at his ability. I think it a strange thing for one to say they loved Lolita, but I did. It’s not only that Nabokov is talented, which he very clearly is. It’s that his prose speaks to me. There are other writers whose style I very much love (Orwell, for instance) and who I rank amongst my favourites. But Nabokov is different. It feels like he distilled language, and if you were to look for the essence of the English language, you would find it in his words.
I don’t know if I’ve read any book in the past two years that tested me the way Lolita did. I’ve put off reading Lolita for years, because I couldn’t deal with the subject matter. Last year, I picked it up in a bookstore and read the first page and Nabokov’s style mesmerized me. It was another couple of months until I bought it, and another month still before I started reading. I have finished quite a number of books while continuing Lolita, mainly because I couldn’t read more than a few pages at a time. I also didn’t want to put it down and lose Nabokov’s incredible words.
“Teachers of Literature are apt to think up such problems as “What is the author’s purpose?” or still worse “What is the guy trying to say?” Now, I happen to be the kind of author who in starting to work on a book has no other purpose than to get rid of that book and who, when asked to explain its origin and growth, has to rely on such ancient terms as Interreaction of Inspiration and Combination — which, I admit, sounds like a conjurer explaining one trick by performing another.” — Vladimir Nabokov
I found the little afterword by Nabokov very enlightening. It’s a welcome look into the writer’s mind. Everyone knows what Lolita is about. I don’t have to summarize it. What I’m trying to grapple with are my thoughts on the book and how it made me feel.
I’m sure everyone is disturbed by pedophiles. But the idea especially disturbed me, from a young age. Think about it — how many children of 12 or 13 watch movies nowadays and fantasize or admire men in their late 30’s or 40’s? I remember the jolt I got when I realized that Brad Pitt was my mother’s age. I was about fifteen, I think. When viewed in respect to things like this Lolita is even more frightening. That’s where Nabokov came from, as well. Humbert describes himself as a handsome man bearing a striking resemblance to an actor Dolores (Lolita) admires.
“I am neither a reader nor a writer of didactic fiction, and, despite John Ray’s assertion, Lolita has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only insofar as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss, that is a sense of being somehow, somewhere, connectd with other states of being where art (curiosity, tenderness, kindness, ecstasy) is the norm. There are not many such books. All the rest is either topical trash or what some call the Literature of Ideas, which very often is topical trash coming in huge blocks of plaster that are carefully transmitted from age to age until somebody comes along with a hammar and takes a good crack at Balzac, at Gorki, at Mann.” — Vladimir Nabokov
On some level, that’s one of the things that makes Lolita such a jarring novel — you read it, and you cannot find a moral string to tie everything up neatly. And it is definitely, definitely true that reading Lolita is succumbing to aesthetic bliss.
“After Olympia Press, in Paris, published the book, an American critic suggested that Lolita was the record of my love affair with the romantic novel. The substitution of “english language” for “romantic novel” would make this elegant formula more correct.” — Vladimir Nabokov
I would not have read this novel had it not been for Nabokov’s irresistible mastery of the English language. You may dispute this, but in my mind I don’t know if I have ever read a writer more talented, or one whose style is so exquisite. There are many, many instances when I just sat, open-mouthed, at his ability. I think it a strange thing for one to say they loved Lolita, but I did. It’s not only that Nabokov is talented, which he very clearly is. It’s that his prose speaks to me. There are other writers whose style I very much love (Orwell, for instance) and who I rank amongst my favourites. But Nabokov is different. It feels like he distilled language, and if you were to look for the essence of the English language, you would find it in his words.
challenging
dark
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes