LK, I don’t have to explain myself to you. You keep coming back to ad hominems and accusations that I’m just making shit up when I explain how my experiences might have helped me form an opinion. As this is the internet, there is nothing I can tell you that will make you believe me. You’re allowed to think I’m lying as much as you like, if that makes you feel better. But I do believe we’re done here as we have come to an impasse.
Having Lolita be your favorite book is like having “Triumph of the Will” be your favorite movie. It doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a Nazi, but you better have a better explanation than “I really like the camera work”.
If I were a pedophile I think I’d probably avoid declaring Lolita my favorite book. I haven’t even read it, but you know, pop culture and all.
Is that because “Triumph” is actually an anti-Nazi film about the depravity of Nazis? I’m just trying to work out the parallel here.
Can we work out a scale? I’m interested in how depraved I am if I like “Lolita” but it’s not my favorite book – like, if it’s in my top 10, I’m 90% depraved, if it’s in my top 50, I’m 80% depraved, and so on.
Metta’s already mentioned that liking “Lolita” makes you a misogynist even if you try to analyze the book, and that Clockwork Orange is just as bad. I’d love to have a definitive list of what I’m allowed to like. I know that Merchant of Venice makes me anti-semitic, and Huckleberry Finn makes me racist. Does liking Hamlet mark me as a potential regicide?
Pride and Prejudice is one of my favourite novels so, despite being a straight male, I’m only romantically interested in handsome men looking for a wife.
The parallel is that both Triumph of the Will and Lolita are deeply disturbing works (Lolita arguably intentionally so) and if they’re your favorite works you should be able to give good reasons for that or I will think you’re a creepy asshole.
Is that because “Triumph” is actually an anti-Nazi film about the depravity of Nazis? I’m just trying to work out the parallel here.
What if it were, but the message was so lost on the general populace that it was commonly referred to as the most important work of anti-semitism produced in the last century? Again, a “Lolita” is not used to describe an underage rape victim. Most people don’t understand that Humbert is lying to them. Nobokov is exploiting the fact that the reader generally reads a book thinking that they will be the ally of the protagonist/narrator to tell the story of a criminal, but it actually takes a very savvy reader to reject the narrator and the protagonist and not the story. Most people are perfectly willing to believe Humbert when he declares that Lo seduced him, because as the protagonist and the narrator, he has control over the “truth” of the book.
You’re allowed to like whatever you want, but don’t be surprised if some people look at you sideways for reading Hustler on the subway.
I don’t think you’re a perv, I don’t think you’re a bad person. I just don’t think you have an analysis that extends beyond the one you were given in English Lit; if you did you wouldn’t like Lolita :o
You know, Lolita isn’t an erotic novel. It’s not in any way explicit. In fact, it’s so circumspect it’s possible to read the novel and not even realize what Humbert actually did.
Well said. I haven’t read Lolita, by the way; just don’t care to offhand. It’s fine for anyone to hate it or even despise it, but so many people with real literary cred have stated how important Nabokov and Lolita are that a categorical statement that you must appreciate it only if you’re a pervert is kind of silly.
Guys, I don’t think Metta got an A in English class.
Yeah, but apparently he’s read Lolita, which is more than I have done…
I’d definitely check it out. As daring as you could want a book to be. Incredible prose, too. If you do get it, try to buy an edition with a bland cover. I was actually called a pervert – in real life, not on the internet – by a woman who saw me reading the book.
The Annotated Lolita has a pretty bland cover. As does the Modern Library edition.
(Having said that, Lolita’s not my favorite Nabokov, and I’d start with one of his other books)
The Story of the Eye is my favorite novel.
I don’t think you’re lying, and I’m almost certain the limitations of forums as well as the way I talk about things are exaggerating the level of tension in this conversation. No part of this makes me feel better or worse. If indeed your life has been plagued with creeps who are most efficiently organized by their affinity for Lolita, then that’s a shame and I’m sorry if I took it as a criticism of the book when your opinion on that would amount to some pretty non-controversial stuff. Because this:
What if it were, but the message was so lost on the general populace that it was commonly referred to as the most important work of anti-semitism produced in the last century? Again, a “Lolita” is not used to describe an underage rape victim. Most people don’t understand that Humbert is lying to them. Nobokov is exploiting the fact that the reader generally reads a book thinking that they will be the ally of the protagonist/narrator to tell the story of a criminal, but it actually takes a very savvy reader to reject the narrator and the protagonist and not the story. Most people are perfectly willing to believe Humbert when he declares that Lo seduced him, because as the protagonist and the narrator, he has control over the “truth” of the book.
reads like a summary of some of its greatest aspects, and having that accessible to a universal audience is not going to happen for anything operating at that level. I would say, though, that opening with “pedo or American analogy” is not a promising start for the point you’re making about a specific creepiness subculture in men. Which I have not encountered myself, but apparently other women tell me it’s out there and they run into it, so what the hell.
(pause to look it up on the web)
Hmm, if liking Lolita makes you a pervert, what does liking this make you?
This is absolutely true. In addition to the recommendation above for Bend Sinister, I would say I like Despair as an introductory work as well. I’m also a big fan of Speak, Memory, but as an autobiography it’s a very different world. Plus, butterflies.
Pale Fire is may favorite of his novels. There are sections in it where he’s using, like, 4 different authorial voices at the same time.
I’ve only read Ada once, but I did really enjoy it. Plus it’s actually science fiction, so SF fans might find it more accessible it on that level.
metta while discussing unpopular film opinions:
metta while discussing unpopular book opinions:
Guess you’re not an “arrogant arsehole” just as long as you don’t use the word “objectively”, huh?
I haven’t read Lolita either, but when someone who substitutes crude feminist ideology for artistic taste says it’s bad I think it must be pretty good…