Just finished the book and, wow, what a tragically wonderful story. I never thought I would be so invested in a character I have zero empathy for. But I have some questions, or rather some undeveloped thoughts, i would like to share:
(1)
What's up with Lolita's race, or at least, everyone's depiction of it?? In the book i swear she's described as having chestnut brown hair and darker skin, like her mother. So why is it that every single drawn Lolita (in book covers, whether there's an outright pic/drawing of a girl or whether skin is simply implied,) she's pictured as a very pale girl with very blonde hair? What's the point of making this change?
Am I simply mistaken? Did I misunderstand that when H.H described her and her mother as "brown", he didn't mean that literally? If I truly confused myself and she never was supposed to be dark-skinned, please let me know because i think i'm going crazy. But if i'm not wrong and she really was a brown child, can someone put into words the true reason for never depicting her that way? What, does a white blondie seem more "fragile" or something? I would like to see your opinion.
(2)
This question has definitely been touched a lot but: is Nabokov a perv?? Before reading the book I thought he mustn't be. Writers throw themselves into the shoes of disturbing people or make themselves witness disturbing things all the time – I thought that, out of curiosity or some other driving element, he put himself in the mind of this pedophile and made a good story out of it. Especially while reading the entire book I never doubted that Nabokov was anything but an author who created a character, because (1) H.H had an objectively weak if not undeveloped argument for liking children and (2) he kept referring to himself as a beast and whatever other adjectives there are to describe his vileness, and he admitted to ruining Lolita's childhood at some point. Okay, all fine and dandy. Then read Nabokov's afterword, and then I got to this part which, mind you, is speaking as himself:
On the other hand, my creature Humbert is a foreigner and an anarchist, and there are many things, besides nymphets, in which I disagree with him.
Woah??? Buddy, what???? "Besides nymphets"??? Does that mean you agree with H.H that you get seduced by "slutty" children????? Can someone decipher this? Because what i get from this statement is that he's, in some form, a pedophile, too. Did i misundersand this sentence, too? because if he truly said this then i don't think i can defend him anymore. what's your opinion on Nabokov and the fact he wrote this book?
this post isn't proof-read (sorry) but thanks for reading to the end, have a wonderful week <3
by DryAd1820
1 Comment
1) 1950s brown probably meant “tanned” not what we would use today. I wouldn’t worry about it, though, like for one it doesn’t really matter for the book and for another the covers for Lolita have almost all been notoriously bad. Nabokov didn’t even want actual girls on it but people didn’t listen.
2) I know you mean this well but I still can’t help but sigh at this question, lol. First of all, you seem to understand that Stephen King isn’t a serial killer, so it’s already a silly question.
Second, you misread that quote entirely. He’s saying he disagrees with him over many things *including* said “nymphets.” This was just a slip up of your brain.
But it’s not your job to defend him, neither is it mine. Discuss the book. Don’t obsess over the author. Ironically, Nabokov only wrote the afterword because people kept harassing him to explain himself as part of not being able to focus on the book itself, and the afterword is very much a “fuck off” to that.