Take a photo of a barcode or cover
471 reviews for:
The Real Lolita: The Kidnapping of Sally Horner and the Novel That Scandalized the World
Sarah Weinman
3.44 AVERAGE
471 reviews for:
The Real Lolita: The Kidnapping of Sally Horner and the Novel That Scandalized the World
Sarah Weinman
3.44 AVERAGE
slow-paced
challenging
dark
emotional
informative
sad
slow-paced
"Knowing about Sally Horner does not diminish Lolita's brilliance, or Nabokov's audacious inventiveness, but it does augment the horror he also captured in the novel."
I had not heard of Sally Horner's case prior to coming across The Real Lolita, so I was really looking forward to this book. I was captivated by the heartbreaking beginning of the book - Sally's story is truly tragic, and I was curious about what all happened.
Unfortunately, there is just not enough information about Sally to fill a book, even though the author did her best. This is the second true crime book I've read this year that really should not have become a book - in both of them, an absurd amount of filler was added in order to pad out the rest of the book.
Only about half of this book was even about Sally - so much of it was speculation & then details about Nabokov. Clearly Nabokov knew about Sally since he mentions her in Lolita, yet a fair amount of the book is spent trying to prove that Lolita is directly based on Sally's story & trying to find out just when Nabokov found out about her. It felt very unnecessary. I don't care when Nabokov found out about Sally because it was obvious that he did - the timing doesn't matter.
I also felt like part of the purpose of the book was to argue that Lolita is problematic. I really don't need someone else to tell me that, and I wouldn't have picked this book up if I knew so much time was going to be focused on Nabokov and Lolita. It ended up feeling like a college paper, which is definitely not what I was hoping for with this book. There was a lot of reaching, and even my final copy could have used more editing. This book could have been an awesome essay or article, but the real story was smothered by unnecessary details & speculation.
I had not heard of Sally Horner's case prior to coming across The Real Lolita, so I was really looking forward to this book. I was captivated by the heartbreaking beginning of the book - Sally's story is truly tragic, and I was curious about what all happened.
Unfortunately, there is just not enough information about Sally to fill a book, even though the author did her best. This is the second true crime book I've read this year that really should not have become a book - in both of them, an absurd amount of filler was added in order to pad out the rest of the book.
Only about half of this book was even about Sally - so much of it was speculation & then details about Nabokov. Clearly Nabokov knew about Sally since he mentions her in Lolita, yet a fair amount of the book is spent trying to prove that Lolita is directly based on Sally's story & trying to find out just when Nabokov found out about her. It felt very unnecessary. I don't care when Nabokov found out about Sally because it was obvious that he did - the timing doesn't matter.
I also felt like part of the purpose of the book was to argue that Lolita is problematic. I really don't need someone else to tell me that, and I wouldn't have picked this book up if I knew so much time was going to be focused on Nabokov and Lolita. It ended up feeling like a college paper, which is definitely not what I was hoping for with this book. There was a lot of reaching, and even my final copy could have used more editing. This book could have been an awesome essay or article, but the real story was smothered by unnecessary details & speculation.
emotional
informative
sad
medium-paced
For more of my reviews, check out my book blog at www.readingreckless.wordpress.com
The Real Lolita is the true crime non fiction book about the true origin of Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. I have tried on three separate occasions to read that book. I own it, but I’ve never finished it, in either it’s novel or movie form.
Sarah Weinman does a deep dive into the 1948 case of Sally Horner (Real name : Florence Horner) which she says is the basis for the Lolita narrative. Sally Horner was aged 11 when she was put on a bus to Atlantic CIty by her mother Ella by the behest of Frank LaSalle. Ella had never met the man, just speaking briefly on the phone with him, as he told her that he was taking a vacation with his wife and children and had room for Little Sally to come along. Upon dropping Sally off at the train station, she didn’t see any family around the middle aged man, nor did he come out to greet her. Ella would not see Sally until 21 months later.
The link between the work and the case has been talked about previously in a number of news articles and magazines, however this book seems to be the only real account of the life of Sally Horner told by documents and accounts told by friends and relatives.
The chapters hop back and forth between the account of Sally’s abduction and abuse and the writing and subsequent publication of Lolita, as well as the adamant refusal to give credence to the claims of his pilfering of the true story for his novel.
This was extremely well written. Weinman told Sally’s story with reverence and tact. The issues with publication detailed in the book could have been left out. The reason being that it had nothing to do with the content of the book.
Here is where I disagree and am confused by Weinman’s line of logic. By her own research and admission, Nabokov started writing about inappropriate relationships before he emigrated to America. In fact, he started writing Lolita before Sally Horner was even taken in 1948. It’s interesting to me that the question posed and the answers given both err on the side of conspiracy.
Is the point of the book to give Sally a voice because her life was cut so short after such a brutal and harrowing experience? Well, no because there isn’t much to garner from the media from that time and most of the people with first hand accounts are dead.
Or is the point to demonize Nabokov for writing a book like Lolita?
In the last few chapters, Weinman makes the point that without a book like Lolita, there wouldn’t have been the popular culture perversion of grown women dressing up in baby doll clothing. I would pose the question: without lolita, would we be as aware of sexual predators in our society? By talking about this, Nabokov gave a voice to something sick and perverse but also told the world that there are people like that in our world.
Is it Nabokov’s fault that pop culture took the book at face value and ascribed sexuality to children instead of seeing the issues with it?
I have heard that I should read Rust and Stardust for a more fleshed out account of Sally Horner’s life, fictitious as it is.
The Real Lolita is the true crime non fiction book about the true origin of Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov. I have tried on three separate occasions to read that book. I own it, but I’ve never finished it, in either it’s novel or movie form.
Sarah Weinman does a deep dive into the 1948 case of Sally Horner (Real name : Florence Horner) which she says is the basis for the Lolita narrative. Sally Horner was aged 11 when she was put on a bus to Atlantic CIty by her mother Ella by the behest of Frank LaSalle. Ella had never met the man, just speaking briefly on the phone with him, as he told her that he was taking a vacation with his wife and children and had room for Little Sally to come along. Upon dropping Sally off at the train station, she didn’t see any family around the middle aged man, nor did he come out to greet her. Ella would not see Sally until 21 months later.
The link between the work and the case has been talked about previously in a number of news articles and magazines, however this book seems to be the only real account of the life of Sally Horner told by documents and accounts told by friends and relatives.
The chapters hop back and forth between the account of Sally’s abduction and abuse and the writing and subsequent publication of Lolita, as well as the adamant refusal to give credence to the claims of his pilfering of the true story for his novel.
This was extremely well written. Weinman told Sally’s story with reverence and tact. The issues with publication detailed in the book could have been left out. The reason being that it had nothing to do with the content of the book.
Here is where I disagree and am confused by Weinman’s line of logic. By her own research and admission, Nabokov started writing about inappropriate relationships before he emigrated to America. In fact, he started writing Lolita before Sally Horner was even taken in 1948. It’s interesting to me that the question posed and the answers given both err on the side of conspiracy.
Is the point of the book to give Sally a voice because her life was cut so short after such a brutal and harrowing experience? Well, no because there isn’t much to garner from the media from that time and most of the people with first hand accounts are dead.
Or is the point to demonize Nabokov for writing a book like Lolita?
In the last few chapters, Weinman makes the point that without a book like Lolita, there wouldn’t have been the popular culture perversion of grown women dressing up in baby doll clothing. I would pose the question: without lolita, would we be as aware of sexual predators in our society? By talking about this, Nabokov gave a voice to something sick and perverse but also told the world that there are people like that in our world.
Is it Nabokov’s fault that pop culture took the book at face value and ascribed sexuality to children instead of seeing the issues with it?
I have heard that I should read Rust and Stardust for a more fleshed out account of Sally Horner’s life, fictitious as it is.
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
fast-paced
You definitely need to read Lolita before reading this book. I would’ve liked this book more if the focus truly was on Sally Horner and not on proving that Nabokov knew about Sally while writing Lolita. Since he mentions Sally in Lolita, there really doesn’t seem to be much to argue about there.
There doesn’t seem to be much source material on Sally’s kidnapping, nor comments from Nabokov on Sally, so there is a lot of fluff in this book. It should’ve been about half as long. Apparently this book was expanded from an article written by the author and I think it should’ve stayed that way.
There doesn’t seem to be much source material on Sally’s kidnapping, nor comments from Nabokov on Sally, so there is a lot of fluff in this book. It should’ve been about half as long. Apparently this book was expanded from an article written by the author and I think it should’ve stayed that way.
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
The rest behind the rating is because I appreciate the extra information both about Nabokov and his wife Vera in relation to his novel, as well as more importantly the story of Sally Horner. I heard of her briefly before in relation to her influence of Lolita but not more than short recaps of information and getting to know the details of the before, what we know of the during, and the after. And it's heartbreaking to know what happened to this young girl throughout that time.