Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
funny
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
what an incredible book. saying this feels both obvious and controversial.
i went into it somewhat apprehensively, wondering if i was going to be reading 300 pages of disgusting sexual fantasy. but that’s not what lolita is at all and i doubt that anyone who thinks it is, actually read the novel.
the book is written in an autobiographical style which gives main character humbert humbert ample opportunity to paint himself as pathetic, help- and powerless; a tragic hero and poetical romantic of sorts. however, he never actually succeeds in making the reader believe in this version of him. as a reader i was — as is to be expected — utterly disgusted by him; his attempts to victimise himself (by villainising dolores as a cunning and evil “nymphet”) are thoroughly transparent and only further intensified my revulsion.
while “lolita” obviously deals with very heavy subject matter, it is also quite funny at times and nabokov uses language in very subversive and surprising ways, utilising unexpected turns of phrase and incorporating french, german and latin at multiple points. additionally, the novel contains an abundance of literary and cultural references that give the text a very layered feel and make the reading experience all the more interesting.
nabokov’s author’s note “on a book entitled lolita” provides context, that further heightened my appreciation of the book, specifically the short passage on the “rules” of pornographic literature (and on why “lolita” isn’t a “lewd”/pornographic novel).
overall, it’s obvious why this is considered a modern classic and i can’t wait to indulge in more of nabokov’s works.
i went into it somewhat apprehensively, wondering if i was going to be reading 300 pages of disgusting sexual fantasy. but that’s not what lolita is at all and i doubt that anyone who thinks it is, actually read the novel.
the book is written in an autobiographical style which gives main character humbert humbert ample opportunity to paint himself as pathetic, help- and powerless; a tragic hero and poetical romantic of sorts. however, he never actually succeeds in making the reader believe in this version of him. as a reader i was — as is to be expected — utterly disgusted by him; his attempts to victimise himself (by villainising dolores as a cunning and evil “nymphet”) are thoroughly transparent and only further intensified my revulsion.
while “lolita” obviously deals with very heavy subject matter, it is also quite funny at times and nabokov uses language in very subversive and surprising ways, utilising unexpected turns of phrase and incorporating french, german and latin at multiple points. additionally, the novel contains an abundance of literary and cultural references that give the text a very layered feel and make the reading experience all the more interesting.
nabokov’s author’s note “on a book entitled lolita” provides context, that further heightened my appreciation of the book, specifically the short passage on the “rules” of pornographic literature (and on why “lolita” isn’t a “lewd”/pornographic novel).
overall, it’s obvious why this is considered a modern classic and i can’t wait to indulge in more of nabokov’s works.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Child abuse, Pedophilia
Moderate: Incest, Misogyny, Rape, Sexual content, Death of parent, Murder
Minor: Car accident, Pregnancy, Alcohol
challenging
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
"Lolita! Light of my life, fire of my loins! My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta... she was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita."
This book is written from the viewpoint of Humbert Humbert. He is writing in jail. He is a psychopath, a pedophile, and he is telling the story of Lolita. In truth, he is telling HIS story of Lolita. In his narcissism, he paints a picture of Lolita as he saw her - and yet still, glimmers of the depressing truth still shine through. The writing is incredible and beautiful. Nabokov is a master of words. What amazes me is that many people see this book as a love story. On the cover of my book, a review says, "The only convincing love story of our century." But no - it is not a love story.
To Humbert, Dolores is not a person. She is simply what he creates. She is His Lolita. He starts the book out with the quote above, taking away her identity, and giving her a new name. In his flowery words and attempts to arouse pity, he twists his words and turns all the blame onto little Dolores Haze.
"Frigid gentlewomen of the jury! I had though that months, perhaps years, would elapse before I dared to reveal myself to Dolores Haze; but by six she was wide awake, and by six fifteen we were technically lovers. I am going to tell you something very strange: it was she who seduced me."
In the beginning of part two is the chapter that shows clearly his psychopathy. Humbert Humbert starts by talking about how difficult Lolita can be. He then outlines how he keeps her in check. He tells her how much he loves her, and how this is normal. Then he continues with threats. If she ever tells anyone, he says, they would blame her, take away the things she loves, and send her to a reformatory. The tone and language changes from sweet and milky to barbed and threatening. He means to frighten her into compliance, and does.
When he callously tells Dolores that her mother is dead, she comes crying to him in the night ("you see, she had no where else to go"). Every night after her "duties" she cries herself to sleep. Only once in the book does Humbert acknowledge he doesn't know the real Dolores.
"It struck me that I simply didn't know a thing about my darling's mind and that quite possibly behind the awful juvenile clichés, there was in her a garden and a twilight, and a palace gate - dim adorable regions which happened to be lucidly and absolutely forbidden to me, in my polluted rags and miserable convulsions."
That insight means nothing to him, for Lolita continues to be just His Lolita, the Lolita of his dreams. I don't know if there is a moral or purpose to this book. I do think it is one of the most sad, beautifully written and impressive books I've ever read. It's disturbing and yet I can't look away from it, and it weighs on my mind.
When I was reading this book, and would tell people about it, they would shrink away from it the instant I told them what it was about. "Why would you read that?" they would say. I would say, "Why wouldn't you???" I think if people just read things that match their lives and always align with their thoughts they are missing an integral part of what books can offer. But aside from that this is one of the most beautifully written books I have ever read. Definitely a favorite.
This book is written from the viewpoint of Humbert Humbert. He is writing in jail. He is a psychopath, a pedophile, and he is telling the story of Lolita. In truth, he is telling HIS story of Lolita. In his narcissism, he paints a picture of Lolita as he saw her - and yet still, glimmers of the depressing truth still shine through. The writing is incredible and beautiful. Nabokov is a master of words. What amazes me is that many people see this book as a love story. On the cover of my book, a review says, "The only convincing love story of our century." But no - it is not a love story.
To Humbert, Dolores is not a person. She is simply what he creates. She is His Lolita. He starts the book out with the quote above, taking away her identity, and giving her a new name. In his flowery words and attempts to arouse pity, he twists his words and turns all the blame onto little Dolores Haze.
"Frigid gentlewomen of the jury! I had though that months, perhaps years, would elapse before I dared to reveal myself to Dolores Haze; but by six she was wide awake, and by six fifteen we were technically lovers. I am going to tell you something very strange: it was she who seduced me."
In the beginning of part two is the chapter that shows clearly his psychopathy. Humbert Humbert starts by talking about how difficult Lolita can be. He then outlines how he keeps her in check. He tells her how much he loves her, and how this is normal. Then he continues with threats. If she ever tells anyone, he says, they would blame her, take away the things she loves, and send her to a reformatory. The tone and language changes from sweet and milky to barbed and threatening. He means to frighten her into compliance, and does.
When he callously tells Dolores that her mother is dead, she comes crying to him in the night ("you see, she had no where else to go"). Every night after her "duties" she cries herself to sleep. Only once in the book does Humbert acknowledge he doesn't know the real Dolores.
"It struck me that I simply didn't know a thing about my darling's mind and that quite possibly behind the awful juvenile clichés, there was in her a garden and a twilight, and a palace gate - dim adorable regions which happened to be lucidly and absolutely forbidden to me, in my polluted rags and miserable convulsions."
That insight means nothing to him, for Lolita continues to be just His Lolita, the Lolita of his dreams. I don't know if there is a moral or purpose to this book. I do think it is one of the most sad, beautifully written and impressive books I've ever read. It's disturbing and yet I can't look away from it, and it weighs on my mind.
When I was reading this book, and would tell people about it, they would shrink away from it the instant I told them what it was about. "Why would you read that?" they would say. I would say, "Why wouldn't you???" I think if people just read things that match their lives and always align with their thoughts they are missing an integral part of what books can offer. But aside from that this is one of the most beautifully written books I have ever read. Definitely a favorite.
I feel weird giving this book a 5-star rating… but it’s necessary. So many people misinterpret the purpose of Lolita, and it’s important to recognize that this is not a book meant to justify or romanticize anything—it’s meant to expose the disturbing reality of how predators rationalize their actions.
Humbert Humbert is the epitome of an unreliable narrator, using poetic prose to manipulate both himself and the reader. Nabokov’s writing is so beautiful and lulling that you almost forget the horror of what’s actually happening—until a single word or phrase jolts you back to the truth. This discomfort is intentional. You’re supposed to feel unsettled, supposed to recognize the insidious nature of Humbert’s justifications.
And, wow, does it work. I am never letting my kids out of my sight again.
Humbert Humbert is the epitome of an unreliable narrator, using poetic prose to manipulate both himself and the reader. Nabokov’s writing is so beautiful and lulling that you almost forget the horror of what’s actually happening—until a single word or phrase jolts you back to the truth. This discomfort is intentional. You’re supposed to feel unsettled, supposed to recognize the insidious nature of Humbert’s justifications.
And, wow, does it work. I am never letting my kids out of my sight again.
dark
emotional
funny
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
According to author Amy Tan, this contentious novel is the limitus test among literary readers. It's a first-person narrative of an obsessive and unreliable pedophile. But don't confuse author Nabokov with his Humbert character in the novel; that's not the point. Nabokov's prose and wordplay are actually enjoyable to read, all the while being barely pornographic, (especially by today's writing standards!) You might even get caught up in Humbert's love story until you catch yourself with "but wait, she is only fourteen years old!" When Lolita herself speaks, she does so with a caustic teenage wit that plays humorously against her hapless bumbling lover. I recommend this one to readers who can see past the obvious subject matter and consider the writing, especially if you don't mind that it is peppered with French phrases throughout. Yes, Nabokov was Russian-born, but this novel is VERY American in its setting to which Nabokov pokes fun at and will make you squirm more than the subject matter itself!
Content Warnings
Moderate: Pedophilia
Minor: Drug use, Rape, Blood, Vomit, Death of parent, Murder, Pregnancy
“Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta.” With these chillingly poetic words, Nabokov sets the tone for a novel that is as beautiful in language as it is horrifying in content. Humbert Humbert, the narrator, casts himself as a tragic romantic figure, a man so consumed by a forbidden passion that he becomes a victim of it but this is a lie he carefully constructs to mask the true horror of his actions. Throughout the novel, Humbert doesn’t just abuse Dolores Haze — he erases her. He robs her of her name, calling her “Lolita,” reducing her to a mythical object of desire, a “nymphet” — a term he invents and repeats to make his obsession seem fated, almost divine. He says, “Between the age limits of nine and fourteen there occur maidens who, to certain bewitched travelers, reveal their true nature which is not human, but nymphic,” casting children as seductresses and himself as helpless prey. In doing so, he absolves himself while dehumanizing his victim. This linguistic trickery is constant. He tells us, “You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style,” and he uses that style like a weapon, drawing readers into his world only to smother the truth of what he’s done. His obsession isn’t just with Dolores’s body, it’s with ownership and control. He says, “I knew I had fallen in love with Lolita forever; but I also knew she would not be forever Lolita,” suggesting his desire is tied to her youth, her vulnerability, and her inability to resist him. He frames his actions as love, but the novel makes clear it is domination, manipulation, and sustained abuse. He lies to himself and to us, painting moments of Dolores’s pain or fear with poetic gloss, even as the reality seeps through. The most horrifying parts of the book are not when Humbert describes what he does, but when the mask slips — when we hear Dolores cry, beg, or act with desperate resignation, and we realize how little power she has. Humbert confesses at one point, “She was only a child, after all, and I was a maniac,” yet the admission is fleeting, buried in justifications. Even when he kills Clare Quilty at the end — not to avenge Dolores, but to restore his own sense of control — he frames it as an act of tortured nobility. Dolores, by then pregnant and impoverished, still refuses him. And that rejection, more than anything, forces Humbert to see — too late — the life he destroyed. Nabokov’s genius is in making us live inside the mind of a predator who believes in his own romance, and it’s nauseating and brilliant. To read Lolita is to witness the slow erosion of a child’s humanity through the eyes of the man who took it from her, cloaked in artful lies. The novel is not a love story; it is a confession, a horror, and a masterpiece that demands a thick stomach and an unwavering moral compass. Humbert’s tragedy is self-made, and Dolores’s is largely unseen — and that, perhaps, is the most devastating part of all.
dark
challenging
dark
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
Really struggled to rate this one. Probably one of the best books I'll never read again. I actually hated it so much and really struggled to get through it, especially at the end when it gets quite graphic. But it is definitely a very cleverly written story, very challenging and unfortunately very vivid. If you can bottle it I'd recommend it but it's not for the faint of heart. Very, very disturbing.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Pedophilia, Rape
If this is your favorite book you’re probably a sicko and I don’t like you. This book is extremely hard to read because of the way he thinks about women and I completely understand it’s through a pedophiles eyes but I feel like that’s a viewpoint no one asked for. The author is a good writer, although he doesn’t know how to use commas to save his life❤️
challenging
dark
medium-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
Content Warnings
Graphic: Adult/minor relationship, Emotional abuse, Incest, Pedophilia, Rape, Sexual assault
Minor: Physical abuse, Racial slurs