Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.44 AVERAGE
3.44 AVERAGE
As a lover of Lolita and Nabokov’s prose I can enjoy The Enchanter but I’m very aware it is only the bones of a much greater creature. If I had read this first or without having enjoyed the subterfuge of Lolita I believe I would have thrown it away without finishing the short 58 pages.
The narration is omnipotent, meaning we see much less deviant attempts to convince the reader of his innocence, there is less of the seductive and unreliable narration we find with Humber Humbert which is interesting to see how Nabokov transformed him from a predator into a predator with a knack for grooming the audience too.
The narration is omnipotent, meaning we see much less deviant attempts to convince the reader of his innocence, there is less of the seductive and unreliable narration we find with Humber Humbert which is interesting to see how Nabokov transformed him from a predator into a predator with a knack for grooming the audience too.
challenging
dark
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
3.5, not nabokov’s best but interesting contextually
Oh Nabokov, you truly are a master of the written word.
I read this novella as part of the Dewey's 24 Hour Readathon this year (my first time attempting it, and a very enjoyable experience!). Seeing as Lolita is one of my favourite books of all-time, I couldn't wait to check out Nabokov's almost precursor to the classic novel.
The unnamed protagonist, the "enchanter" himself, is a mixture of funny, calculating, and vile. The way in which he weaves his spider's web around the young girl he becomes obsessed with and her mother is perfectly devious, and I loved waiting for him to constantly trip up or get caught.
Nabokov's writing is as usual on point and a joy to read, even with the disturbing subject matter. Despite its tiny length, the story was perfectly structured and paced. It never lagged, and the attention to detail was brilliant. If you're a fan of Lolita or Nabokov's work in general, I'd definitely recommend checking this out.
I read this novella as part of the Dewey's 24 Hour Readathon this year (my first time attempting it, and a very enjoyable experience!). Seeing as Lolita is one of my favourite books of all-time, I couldn't wait to check out Nabokov's almost precursor to the classic novel.
The unnamed protagonist, the "enchanter" himself, is a mixture of funny, calculating, and vile. The way in which he weaves his spider's web around the young girl he becomes obsessed with and her mother is perfectly devious, and I loved waiting for him to constantly trip up or get caught.
Nabokov's writing is as usual on point and a joy to read, even with the disturbing subject matter. Despite its tiny length, the story was perfectly structured and paced. It never lagged, and the attention to detail was brilliant. If you're a fan of Lolita or Nabokov's work in general, I'd definitely recommend checking this out.
A fascinating proto-Lolita, but more fascinating as proto-Lolita than as a book in its own right. I can see why Nabokov might have been dissatisfied with it; the nameless narrator lacks both Humbert Humbert's charm and the full flower of his monstrosity, perhaps because we spend so much less time with him in a novella vs. a full novel. But the skeleton of Lolita is there, waiting to be adorned with more ornate flesh, and Nabokov's prose skills are as always superb.
This is supposedly a precursor to [b:Lolita|7604|Lolita|Vladimir Nabokov|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1377756377s/7604.jpg|1268631] (which i have never read). a short story about too much desire I suppose? The language was beautiful and quite obviously translated. I didn't so much like the story as much as I liked the way the man writes. It was hard to get into but once you dug down and got in there it felt like a continuous train of thought.
three stars for writing. meh with the story. pretty obsessive to say the least.
three stars for writing. meh with the story. pretty obsessive to say the least.
As someone who adored Lolita, I was a bit disappointed I didn't like this Ur-Lolita more. It lacked the lyricism of Humbert Humbert, and the personality of the would-be-Lolita.
Granted, I know this was a long-forgotten precursor, but still, my hopes were high.
Granted, I know this was a long-forgotten precursor, but still, my hopes were high.
I don't know if I will ever manage to deeply like Nabokov. Short, typical for its style, but not to my taste.