Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
"I loved you. I was a pentapod monster, but I loved you. I was despicable and brutal, and turpid, and everything, mais je t'aimais, je t'aimais! And there were times when I knew how you felt, and it was hell to know it, my little one."
Lolita was one hell of a trip. The story follows Humbert Humbert, a decently handsome man, who tries to refrain from his perversions but finds himself absolutely incapable after finding and falling in love with 12 year old nymphet Dolores Haze (AKA Dolly, Lo, Lolita).
Of course, Humbert is an unreliable narrator, writing this story, with the intention of publication, in a jail cell for committing murder. That, plus the fact that in the end Dolores left him and had no romantic feelings toward him whatsoever probably made him want to fudge the story a bit. So most likely, certain emotions carried out throughout the novel were probably written more in his favor. Ex.: Lolita coming on to him, Lolita being exuberantly bratty, Humbert being as kind and patient as he claimed to be. Although, many miss-evaluations through his perspective could have also been due to the fact that his love-blindness wouldn't let him see through to the fact that while he was relishing in her company, Lo was for the most part abhorred by him as well as depressed by the situation and growing loneliness.
From the beginning to around the middle of this novel, I continued sympathizing with Lolita, giving the reasons that she was a child, she was the victim, and she was the orphan prey of a pervert. However, I ultimately couldn't help hating her completely after their first journey around the states began. The reason for this, once again, is because of the way she was viewed by our unreliable narrator. Still, her bratty-ness did make me cringe a lot, especially during the chapters leading up to her escape.
Also she does deserve sympathy, she was not a perfect or more less even good person either. Molded by the relationship her and Humbert ensue upon, she grows up with ill ideals and no appreciation for her what possible joy could be in the miserable life she must leave. Arguably, it could be said that Lolita had more control in the relationship then Humbert had. Constantly working to appease her as to give her as much comfort possible so she would not run away, Humbert was practically tied around Lolita's finger. This was another reason why I found myself sympathizing more towards our protagonist then towards Lolita; he was just so utterly controlled by his love for Lolita and therefore Lolita herself.
Talking aside from the plot, this book was absolutely beautifully written. I have a feeling the way it was so intricately composed was due in part to the original writing being in Russian, but still, I couldn't help continously asking myself while reading "How does a human know how to compile a bunch of words so gracefully?" The vocabulary was sometimes big and the passages could also be in very long paragraph, which is why I'd say this is a very mature read, alongside the plot itself of course.
At points this book did get a bit boring for me, but that feeling usually only lasted for a chapter, and then the story went back to being interesting again.
Overall, I rate this novel 3 stars ★★★☆☆
Lolita was one hell of a trip. The story follows Humbert Humbert, a decently handsome man, who tries to refrain from his perversions but finds himself absolutely incapable after finding and falling in love with 12 year old nymphet Dolores Haze (AKA Dolly, Lo, Lolita).
Of course, Humbert is an unreliable narrator, writing this story, with the intention of publication, in a jail cell for committing murder. That, plus the fact that in the end Dolores left him and had no romantic feelings toward him whatsoever probably made him want to fudge the story a bit. So most likely, certain emotions carried out throughout the novel were probably written more in his favor. Ex.: Lolita coming on to him, Lolita being exuberantly bratty, Humbert being as kind and patient as he claimed to be. Although, many miss-evaluations through his perspective could have also been due to the fact that his love-blindness wouldn't let him see through to the fact that while he was relishing in her company, Lo was for the most part abhorred by him as well as depressed by the situation and growing loneliness.
From the beginning to around the middle of this novel, I continued sympathizing with Lolita, giving the reasons that she was a child, she was the victim, and she was the orphan prey of a pervert. However, I ultimately couldn't help hating her completely after their first journey around the states began. The reason for this, once again, is because of the way she was viewed by our unreliable narrator. Still, her bratty-ness did make me cringe a lot, especially during the chapters leading up to her escape.
Also she does deserve sympathy, she was not a perfect or more less even good person either. Molded by the relationship her and Humbert ensue upon, she grows up with ill ideals and no appreciation for her what possible joy could be in the miserable life she must leave. Arguably, it could be said that Lolita had more control in the relationship then Humbert had. Constantly working to appease her as to give her as much comfort possible so she would not run away, Humbert was practically tied around Lolita's finger. This was another reason why I found myself sympathizing more towards our protagonist then towards Lolita; he was just so utterly controlled by his love for Lolita and therefore Lolita herself.
Talking aside from the plot, this book was absolutely beautifully written. I have a feeling the way it was so intricately composed was due in part to the original writing being in Russian, but still, I couldn't help continously asking myself while reading "How does a human know how to compile a bunch of words so gracefully?" The vocabulary was sometimes big and the passages could also be in very long paragraph, which is why I'd say this is a very mature read, alongside the plot itself of course.
At points this book did get a bit boring for me, but that feeling usually only lasted for a chapter, and then the story went back to being interesting again.
Overall, I rate this novel 3 stars ★★★☆☆
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
sad
tense
challenging
dark
emotional
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
I didn’t like this book but not because of the theme. I can appreciate an author pushing a boundary and exploring a terrible perspective. I think for me, it was the writing style that was less appealing. I found my attention drifting often. I wonder if someone wrote a more modernized version of it, if I’d enjoy it more.
It was a great effort to figure out what I thought of this book. The first half was beautifully written and very amusing and 4 stars would have suited. As it progressed I found myself enjoying it less and less so that then 3 stars, and finally 2 stars seemed suitable. A brilliant 3 or 4 page passage describing tennis made me rethink this low score but alas, it wasn't quite enough.
The thing is, if I hadn't read one of Nabokov's other works (Pale Fire) already I would have been more impressed by Lolita. (I should also here point out that the structure of the story, and particularly the climax, was almost identical to that of Pale Fire. Was it impossible for Vlad to think up another story?!). Nabokov seems to stick to a very particular way of writing which is jumbled, and high-brow, and poetic, and difficult to decipher. This worked well in Pale Fire, where the Narrator was quite confused and cryptic (and insane) himself, and the story was made much more real through this writing style. I can see now that this was not really done on purpose. Nabokov just tends to write like this all the time. Fair enough. But in this book I would rather know what is happening in the story than struggle to decipher which character it was that said this or that.
This book has gained quite a following, partly because of its difficult and evocative and controversial subject matter, partly because of its prose-style, but mostly because it is fame and notoriety breeds more fame and notoriety. As with a lot of other art, knowing about something BEFORE you experience it makes you much more likely to enjoy the experience of knowing it. Yes, I am cynical. But cynicism is normally pretty good at shedding light on the true situation.
The thing is, if I hadn't read one of Nabokov's other works (Pale Fire) already I would have been more impressed by Lolita. (I should also here point out that the structure of the story, and particularly the climax, was almost identical to that of Pale Fire. Was it impossible for Vlad to think up another story?!). Nabokov seems to stick to a very particular way of writing which is jumbled, and high-brow, and poetic, and difficult to decipher. This worked well in Pale Fire, where the Narrator was quite confused and cryptic (and insane) himself, and the story was made much more real through this writing style. I can see now that this was not really done on purpose. Nabokov just tends to write like this all the time. Fair enough. But in this book I would rather know what is happening in the story than struggle to decipher which character it was that said this or that.
This book has gained quite a following, partly because of its difficult and evocative and controversial subject matter, partly because of its prose-style, but mostly because it is fame and notoriety breeds more fame and notoriety. As with a lot of other art, knowing about something BEFORE you experience it makes you much more likely to enjoy the experience of knowing it. Yes, I am cynical. But cynicism is normally pretty good at shedding light on the true situation.
It was difficult to finish, very difficult, and boring. The moral questions are interesting, more a book to be studied and picked apart and appreciated, as opposed to a leisurely read.
dark
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
i find this in my hs library but sadly i can’t finish this
challenging
dark
funny
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes