You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
Self-aware paedophile writes a memoir.
I thought I would dislike the book but HH's humour and self-awareness combined with beautiful wordplay makes it hard to.
I thought I would dislike the book but HH's humour and self-awareness combined with beautiful wordplay makes it hard to.
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:
No
fuckass Humbert
challenging
dark
mysterious
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
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
It'd been about a decade since I read it for the first time. I’ve read it even more slowly than the first time around, pondering over practically every passage. Nabokov’s prose is simply sublime, and Dolores’s character is one of those that stays with you forever, with how much one can pour and read into her.
This book was kind of boring tbh... anyways.
I guess part of writing an unreliable narrator is getting your readers to distrust the narrator, and what better way to do so than making the narrator a murderous pedophile?
Nabokov understands this very well. His use of language is elegant and refined, which, in turn, adds to HH’s charm, perhaps the same charm that seduced Dolores in the first place (I should be more careful of men). HH is clearly intelligent, prompting the reader to question him at every moment (Is he actually hot? Dolores isn’t like that).
What I was most fascinated by, however, was Dolores’ loneliness. Her eventual attraction to the theatre was hinted at with her earlier obsessions with movie stars, with stories and comics. My favourite part of Lolita might be the moment where she watches a play performed and is too overwhelmed to tear herself away - something that HH doesn’t seem to realise at all.
However, there are some highly confusing moments in the novel. Rita, for instance, seems to exist solely for the purpose of being a joke character that fills up HH’s life for a few years. The scene in which HH kills Quilty, a key scene in the novel’s denouement, feels as if Nabokov woke up one day, thought “haha pedophiles”, and then got HH and Quilty to wrestle each other naked. The scene with Quilty’s guests who thank HH for killing their host is just as humorous. Was I entertained? Yes. Is that all that matters? No.
Ultimately, though Lolita functions as an excellent example of/introduction to an unreliable narrator, it’s lacking in theme, rather dull and has odd shifts in tone.
I guess part of writing an unreliable narrator is getting your readers to distrust the narrator, and what better way to do so than making the narrator a murderous pedophile?
Nabokov understands this very well. His use of language is elegant and refined, which, in turn, adds to HH’s charm, perhaps the same charm that seduced Dolores in the first place (I should be more careful of men). HH is clearly intelligent, prompting the reader to question him at every moment (Is he actually hot? Dolores isn’t like that).
What I was most fascinated by, however, was Dolores’ loneliness. Her eventual attraction to the theatre was hinted at with her earlier obsessions with movie stars, with stories and comics. My favourite part of Lolita might be the moment where she watches a play performed and is too overwhelmed to tear herself away - something that HH doesn’t seem to realise at all.
However, there are some highly confusing moments in the novel. Rita, for instance, seems to exist solely for the purpose of being a joke character that fills up HH’s life for a few years. The scene in which HH kills Quilty, a key scene in the novel’s denouement, feels as if Nabokov woke up one day, thought “haha pedophiles”, and then got HH and Quilty to wrestle each other naked. The scene with Quilty’s guests who thank HH for killing their host is just as humorous. Was I entertained? Yes. Is that all that matters? No.
Ultimately, though Lolita functions as an excellent example of/introduction to an unreliable narrator, it’s lacking in theme, rather dull and has odd shifts in tone.
Creo que me es muy difícil poder dar una reseña sobre este libro, pero si algo puedo decir es que la pluma de Nabokov es increíble, y la forma en la que retrata el mundo perverso del protagonista, para mí, está a otro nivel. Creo que hay que leer este libro partiendo de que sabes de qué va, y dejar a un lado cualquier prejuicio, fundamentado o no. Leerlo con otros ojos, más allá de simplemente la historia de un pedófilo, para poder disfrutarlo, sino solo será eso, la historia de un pedófilo. La maestría que demuestra en el uso de las metáforas y analogías es de una calidad exquisita.
Si alguna pega puedo poner, es que los delirios y descripciones de Humbert, que a veces ocupaban paginas y paginas, se volvían algo tedioso y lento.
Si alguna pega puedo poner, es que los delirios y descripciones de Humbert, que a veces ocupaban paginas y paginas, se volvían algo tedioso y lento.
Written from the POV of a pedophile and abuser, the book is incredibly uncomfortable and disturbing, which is the purpose. Not sure I would necessarily recommend it but I do feel smarter for having read it after seeing so many references in other books and society. The stacks podcast bookclub episode with Traci Thomas helped me unpack the book, and understand it deeper. The audiobook with Jeremy Irons is very, very well done.
challenging
dark
sad
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes