ŷ

Chris's Reviews > Lolita

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
733629
's review

it was ok

*Ranked as one of the Top 100 Fiction of the 20th Century*
I’m not quite sure how to put this in words. Hell, I’m not sure what I intend to say, so this is going to be ugly. If you want to sit in on this exercise be my guest, you’ve probably got more important things to do, such as organizing your cassette tapes and LPs before shoving them in a box destined for the attic, believe me, your time will be better spent, especially when you take that stroll down memory lane and consider how killer it would be to rock out to Depeche Mode and A-Ha all afternoon (it’s possible you’re one of those badasses with some Dead Kennedys on cassette, more power to you, feel free to tear off your shirt and bathe with a 40oz of Big Bear). You might want to clean your bong while you’re at it; you never know how immersed you’ll get in the hazy recollections of your exploits during the New Wave or burgeoning Hardcore era and might prefer a soundtrack to complement your deranged thoughts.

As for Lolita, maybe this tangential bullshit will help get my point across� I’ve recently taken a keen interest in watching “Deadliest Catch�, but as soon as the show concludes I wonder “What have I walked away with, after investing 50 minutes and 4 rum & cokes to the accompaniment of these awe-inspiring images of man battling the elements to strike bepincered gold?� Not much, appears to be the answer; it’s just a bunch of crabs, crabs, crabs, and master-baiting, the simple ingredients of all my friendships and relationships. Sure, it’s awesome to watch sea-faring maniacs risk life and limb to haul in the nasty creatures that pay their bills, but there’s nothing else to it, just dudes getting stoked over a huge haul of crabs, or lamenting some element of the life they’ve chosen. Then you get to thinking how these dudes� wives manage without them at sea for 20+ days at a time; obviously they are in the crab-catching business as well. And the real kick in the ass is that I don’t even eat crab, hell, I’ve never even tried a dish that incorporates any crab. When I consider the ridiculousness of it all, it seems pretty disheartening. This sort of pointless introspection is probably how Des Esseintes got his start, so I’ll leave it at that before it becomes habit-forming.

I can’t say that my opinion of Lolita is much different. It’s just Humbert Humbert endlessly rhapsodizing about nymphettes, most substantially, his nymphette, Lolita. And that’s it; I’ve probably never read anything so one-dimensional in my life. I’m sure the upper echelons of literary critics found myriad reasons beyond my primitive sensibilities for including this in the Top 100 works of 20th century fiction, I just don’t happen to see it. One of these qualifiers might be this absurd statement on the back cover, ‘Lolita is also the story of a hypercivilized European colliding with the cheerful barbarism of postwar America�. Now, when we consider the social climate at the time of publication, with book-banning and obscenity trials recently being all the rage, and you know that in order to somehow foist upon the public a tale concerning a grown man’s obsession and fornication with a 12 year old girl the defenders of this thinly-veiled smut have to somehow show that there is something above and beyond mere prurient interest hidden between the covers of the book, so statements like the one above are thrown out there to mind-f#ck all. I don’t even know what the hell that statement on the cover is supposed to mean, but ‘postwar America� were powerful buzzwords at the time, and truly, what else could you possibly use as a thematic defense for this book, seeing as the book has nothing to offer except the ridiculous tale of a weathered old pervert ogling young girls on the hopscotch courts, finding one that epitomizes his unacceptable desires, and eventually having his way with her before attempting to completely control her young body and mind during a trek that can only be considered kidnapping on the grandest scale. Let’s not forget that when his precious nymphette is purloined by an unknown fiend, he goes off to ambush the guy and shoot his ass; this is not the behavior of the ‘hypercivilized�; my own rather sloppy upbringing declares that anyone with a shred of civility offers his adversary a duel rather than attack him unawares, Humbert is a lowly coward of the worst disposition. The ‘hypercivilized� don’t go around bagging 85 pound kids sporting skinned knees from spills at the roller-rink, real men fish for those awesome and voluptuous Amazonians, the women who proudly stand 5�10� or more and have generous curves that modern fabrics fruitlessly struggle to contain from spilling forth in all their fully-developed glory. Our man Humbert has no such redeeming qualities; he’s a scoundrel of the lowest and basest rank. Let’s not forget that he weeps, and when I conjure a mental image of the elusive ‘hypercivilized European�, weeping like a bitch and throwing a tantrum doesn’t enter the picture.

While the frauds who compiled the Top 100 Fiction list and I might diverge in our estimations of Lolita, I will agree with our man John Updike when he states “Nabokov writes prose the only way it should be written, that is, ecstatically.� There is no denying that the book is phenomenally written, but the repetition of nymphette-this and nymphette-that simply overwhelmed me; I was left with an indelible image of Nabokov sitting there alternately referencing his thesaurus and a collection of kiddie porn for inspiration while hammering this out. I’d have enjoyed this book a thousand times more had it been about turtles, or walnuts, or my mother's first communion, hell, anything else. Nymphettes suck: there is a reason I don’t go trolling for trim at the nearest bus station, who the hell wants to put up with the behavior of a pubescent trollop?

There isn’t a whole hell of a lot that I know, but I do know this; if my choices were either read Lolita again or spend a day crabbing in the arctic, I’d better be prepared to get some frostbite on my beanbag.
379 likes · flag

Sign into ŷ to see if any of your friends have read Lolita.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

Started Reading
April 1, 2008 – Shelved
April 1, 2008 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-50 of 53 (53 new)


message 1: by Anna (new) - added it

Anna I was left with an indelible image of Nabokov sitting there alternately referencing his thesaurus and a collection of kiddie porn for inspiration while hammering this out.

hahahahaha. well played.


message 2: by Sam (last edited Jun 14, 2008 07:54PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Sam Dear Chris,

I enjoyed your review, and when I finished reading Lolita, I felt the same way you felt about the novel. Nabokov's afterword, wherein he rants about the silliness of "books with ideas" and other literary purposes, reinforced my confusion and displeasure.

Undeniably, Humbert Humbert was obsessed with Lolita as an object, not as a person. Thinking about it a couple days later, I began to think readers of Lolita reenact Humbert Humbert's cross-eyed masturbatory fantasy with the novel rather than the girl. Humbert Humbert is to Nymphet as Nabokov reader is to "Lolita." Postmodernism, picture-within-picture, etc. If my theory were true, Nabokov would be even more extraordinarily clever than all those well-placed puns made him out to be. More importantly, my theory helped me come to terms with wasting two days reading Lolita.



message 3: by Georgia (last edited Aug 11, 2008 02:13PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Georgia I found your review highly entertaining but I feel that you missed the thrust of the novel. The novel is basically about this young girl who has the capacity to completely destroy this man who is helpless againist her adolescent charm. Tis not the story of an old pervert who kidnaps a child againist her will, it is the story of a man like any other who has a fatal flaw, who is helpless againist it and in the end he is destroyed by that which he cannot conquer. I did however enjoy your review of the accepted mature woman and agree that all men should seek out our curved bodies. A child could destroy this man but a woman would leave him the husk of the man he once was; he would be playing with his own feces at the end of the novel or worse, holding our purse while we we're standing at the jewelry counter.


message 4: by Christy (new)

Christy I actually love the book, but I think your complaints are valid and your review is very entertaining.

For me, from a psychology standpoint, I enjoyed the book because it was about a liar. The ultimate narcissist who is so busy mocking a school teacher, he misses hearing the laundry list of symptoms his Lolita is exhibiting because of his continuous rape.

The prose is gorgeous and the story disturbing. I have never agreed with a single other person's interpretation of what the story means. That is what I find most fascinating. That the story can and has been interpreted in so many ways. For some people, there is no subtext and Humbert is exactly who he says he is. For others, the entire story is the lie and the subtext is the truth. For others, it is somewhere in the middle and for film-makers, it has turned into a tale of a young, hyper sexual woman perverting a helpless man. That one boggles me the most.

Part of the fascination with Lolita has to do with our own minds and how we see the world. It's a mind fuck.

Sorry I'm rambling. Good review.


message 5: by Wayne (new) - added it

Wayne WOW!!!
Dear Chris and all you other Reviewers (I dub You All with a capital letter.)
I have just added LOLITA to my To-be-read List after reading a brief and stimulating review by a novelist Debra Adelaide which I have quoted in full and can be perused on this site.
Your Reviews have only added to my interest in what appears to be a multi-layered book..sorry Chris ,that last comment doesn't coincide with your one-dimensional interpretation!!
So I WILL RETURN to add to the discussion once I get time to bed down with Lolita..God, I hope THAT wasn't a Freudian slip!!1
Cheers from Wayne
)



message 6: by Louis (new)

Louis Monahan hmmm. i dont think Chris has read the book, or he has and is the pun of it, that it why he dislikes it. the book is also criticising American society which Nabokov reveals to be so incredibly vulgar, in comparison to the European society which is cultured and has history. You sir, are a typical american to which this book is criticising; the boring, imagination-less, rule-bound sheep.


message 7: by Guyasuta (last edited Mar 14, 2009 08:36AM) (new)

Guyasuta Look: Read Nabokov's Pnin. It is beautifully written, just as clever, satirical, funny, and Nabokov's virtuosity with the English language, his choice of words and phrases is superior in this MS. The main character is an endearing fellow...You just want to hug him. It is a shorter novel and it absolutely does not languish. Lolita, I must agree, is an exercise in tedium. When the insufferable Humbertx2 decides to pack up and hit the road with Lo for a second time, you find yourself moaning, and it is not the moan of wanton pleasure. Cute puns and satirical polish notwithstanding, you want to fast forward through the repetitive exploits. The problem with Lolita is that the two main characters are not real. Their behavior is adolscent - behavior which feels too old for Lolita, too young for Humbert. I'm sorry, a twelve year old American child engaging in droll French reparte with a forty year old short-eyed creep who belongs on the registry and imagines himself irresistable - it all has the bizarre tone of a dark alice in wonderland, this one more abhorrent than amusing, where the tea party (or should we say the kool aide party?) never ends and it is impossible to warm up to any, i mean ANY, of the characters. I know it is not prerequisite to good literature that we like every or any character. But I hated Humbert most of all for asking me to follow him through this mind-numbing personal odyssey. Give me Leopold Bloom any day of the week.

But Pnin I loved. And late in his very brief but wonderful story when he is alone in his house, his dream house, after an absolutely sparkling party (how perfectly Nabokov employs this literary device!)you want to cry for him as the simple act of washing dishes becomes a longingly poignant symbol (to you, if not to poor Pnin)of the sadness of this man's honest existence. Such simple, beautifully painted and emotionally charged scenes I find rarely in any literature. Display Nabokov's celebrated book, leatherbound, in your "show-and-tell" library, but pick this one up and read it. Now! Nabokov was a gifted weaver of colorful cloth in his borrowed language. And in Pnin (not in Lolita) he is also a spinner of exquisite yarn.


anne s. Don't agree one bit, but I like the way you say it, especially the beanbag part.


Libby I really agree with you on this one Chris and if I had a beanbag I would gladly risk it to frostbite too.




Sheila Excellent review Chris! I could not have said it better myself.


Grillo It's interesting that this passage you quoted is on the back of the book:

"Lolita is also the story of a hypercivilized European colliding with the cheerful barbarism of postwar America'"

...because in Nabokov's afterword, he actually ridicules people who interpret the novel in this way. I noticed someone above also used this same inaccurate interpretation to ridicule you...pretty amusing.


message 12: by Liane (new)

Liane Spicer Loved your review. I've read a lot of hype about this book but the subject matter is such a turnoff for me I haven't gotten around to reading it yet.

I'll read it, and form my own impressions. Being a beanbag-challenged amazon type with a low threshold for ick, I hope I don't regret it.


Swantonist awful review. zero valid points. "it's about kiddie porn" it doesn' have to be about anything. It's literature at it's finest.
Go write something "better" instead of reviewing books loser.


message 14: by Carly (new)

Carly Svamvour The book and the movie has always struck me as being a lot of hooey . . . can't really decide whether I consider it a 'bad vibes' on older men, or teenage girls.

A reader shouldn't be left wondering either of two things;

1) don't trust older men;

2) don't trust teenage girls . . .

But that's what the story seems to be saying.

Oh yeah . . . and divorcees . . . bad women!



message 15: by Carly (new)

Carly Svamvour And about the crabs . . . well . . . I can't even eat them! It's not that I don't like them - they just don't like me.

I always end up with severe cramps afterwards.

Smoked oysters affect me like that too. So when I'm at the buffet, I'll leave my share of them for you.




message 16: by Carly (new)

Carly Svamvour And I like that suggestion somebody gave you, Chris - you should write something.

Maybe you already have, I dunno' . . . but there's probably a novel in you just waiting to flow from your pen.


message 17: by nicole (last edited May 29, 2010 01:03PM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

nicole Christina wrote: "I actually love the book, but I think your complaints are valid and your review is very entertaining.

For me, from a psychology standpoint, I enjoyed the book because it was about a liar. The ult..."


Chris,
I honestly did not read your review. I scanned your essay of rambling to get to your point about Lolita and I did not find your argument interesting.

Christina,
I found your quick review handled the Lolita controversy without all the filler. The story can be interpreted in so many ways and it is hard for one to find the truths within the story. Since the narration comes from Humbert, you only see what he wants your to see but there are moments where reality slips through.

I feel like there are moments where Humbert is is able to gain the sympathy of the readers. Then you remember the perverted situation these characters are in and you feel such disgust as you continue on with the story. I remember feeling uncomfortable while reading Lolita, but I was unable to stop.

When this book first came out, imagine the controversy being the writer. It is amazing and disturbing that Nabokov manages to create a convincingly perverted, and yet charismatic, character such as Humbert in this story. Nabokov probably had to deal with more shit from society than a person like Chris. If Lolita was as one-dimensional as Chris's review it would not be labeled such a classic.


Melly Very entertaining review and I'd probably read a novel written in your voice. I do, however, disagree with a lot of it. I love Lolita and the craftsmanship of the novel. I do have a similar opinion to yours on Lolita to Catcher in the Rye. Over-hyped, eye-rolling nonsense - I just wasn't rebellious enough to appreciate it, I guess. To each...and all that.


William Very lame and overblown review.


Steve Chris, keep smoking cigarettes, playing in the attic, and watching deadliest catch...you're a true artist.


message 21: by Yeliz (new) - rated it 1 star

Yeliz I don't understand why this book has a cult following. Why is it hard for people to accept that someone does not like this book? Nobody needs to provide anybody with a satisfying reason to not like the book. No reason is as good as any reason in literature because ultimately, its all an interpretation. Swantonist and others are really ridiculous name calling... liking or disliking something does not make it right or wrong. Get over it.


message 22: by Dean (new) - rated it 1 star

Dean It is amazing how hard people are willing to struggle to cast this book in a positive light. It was like reading a well-written story about a pile of crap. It was a pure waste of my time, and it is one of the few books that bored me so much that I gave up and quit reading it. . . and I have never since even wondered how it ended.


message 23: by John (new) - rated it 1 star

John It's just a dirty book that was very fashionable at the time.

Some people just can't let go of their youth.


Valjeanne Jeffers Detailed and hilarious :)!! And here I was thinking I'd found my way into that well-known club we've all heard about:"Am I the only one who hates this book?"


Amanda I came across your review and I loved it! I agree with you completely about this book.


message 26: by laura (new)

laura Wow, amazing review. I definitely won't be reading this book. Thanks for the insight;I'll be having crab for dinner...


message 27: by laura (new)

laura Yeliz wrote: "I don't understand why this book has a cult following. Why is it hard for people to accept that someone does not like this book? Nobody needs to provide anybody with a satisfying reason to not like..."

Amen.


Jessie R Have only watched the film but considering reading the book. Just because I like reading and well..
The discussion threads over this book are so heated and lively.
I really liked your review and it's nice to know that there are some good guys left in this world:))
I haven't seen deadliest catch yet but I get a similar vibe from Man vs Wild, haha^_^


Elleaura True bad ass ;)


Patrick I stopped reading after the deadliest catch confession because you lost all my respect as a reviewer and a person. Please die.


message 31: by Meg-Anne (new) - added it

Meg-Anne "real men fish for those awesome and voluptuous Amazonians, the women who proudly stand 5�10� or more and have generous curves that modern fabrics fruitlessly struggle to contain from spilling forth in all their fully-developed glory"

Why oh why couldn't you have left out that height requirement??? I guess real men won't be fishing for me anytime soon since I proudly stand way shorter then 5'10". ;)
Haven't read the book but was thinking about it - your review is hilarious though.


Jesse I shall cast my vote in that your skill displayed in writing this review rivals that of Nabokov. Points valid and agreed on. Kudos, sir.


Brittany completely, completely agree. thanks for saying it the way you did.


Magadored wants to extrude your face normals Hilarious and apt review. I don't watch the Deadliest Catch but I understand the fascination with the novelty of these reality TV shows and how masturbatory that interest is. Whether it's watching Bear Grylls drink his own urine or another Mom spray-tanning her 5 year old to win a plastic trophy, I'm not exactly coming away from the experience thinking deep thoughts. It's voyeurism. I felt the same way about Lolita in the end. It's just a soap opera where the draw is supposed to be insight into the mind of a pedophile, except it's not very deep, incredibly scripted, and ultimately trashy.


message 35: by abbi (new) - rated it 5 stars

abbi Georgia wrote: "I found your review highly entertaining but I feel that you missed the thrust of the novel. The novel is basically about this young girl who has the capacity to completely destroy this man who is ..."

I'm sorry but I can't help but say this, but that is a disturbing view. Although I don't blame you for thinking that because it is in part what Nabokov set out to do; make a disgusting and cowardly man appear sympathetic. Make no mistake, "Lolita" or her true name Dolores, was misguided and as curious as any pre-pubescent child; but she was taken advantage of and trapped by an obsessed, possessive brute, who hides his true character in lyrical prose and finger pointing. Her sadness and disillusionment shows through multiple times in the narrative. Please don't demonize her.


message 36: by Somerandom (new) - added it

Somerandom "The novel is basically about this young girl who has the capacity to completely destroy this man who is helpless againist her adolescent charm."

Wtf? No seriously wtf? Did you miss the fact that she's a fucking child? Did you miss every single time Humbert acknowledges the complete and utter destruction of her as a human by HIM? Did you miss the part about how she's not even a pubescent teen when he RAPES her?
Like seriously? I know interpretation is individual but what you just wrote was nothing more than CHILD RAPE apologetics. He's unable to resist her charm? NO! He's a fucking adult and should take responsibility like one. Not foist it upon a child he manipulated in the first place.


Jessie R Great review!
This book is certainly very polarising and I can understand why..
I guess the greatest thing to come from this novel (apart from the brilliant wordplay) is the interesting and inevitable debates that have followed.

By the way, I am a slender gal, though well over 5:10--try not to hold it against me


Blake Jansen This book is the farthest thing from one-dimensional. The fact that you said that discredits any of your thoughts on the novel, because obviously you didn't understand it in the slightest.


message 39: by Ryan (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ryan I think you summarized your review best, "tangential bullshit". I think it's odd you'd pick a book about a man's obsession with a child then complain excessively about the subject matter being a man's obsession with children.

Is your review of going swimming "Yeah it's great but I just hate that you get all wet!"


message 40: by [deleted user] (new)

just sayin'- not evey woman is curvy. not every woman is tall. your body shouldn't have anything to do with your being loved. it doesn't matter whether you're 100 pounds or 150. whether you're tall or short. whether you have curves or angles. a real woman is a woman of any shape or size. and we all deserve to be loved.


Kelsey Joy 'Nymphettes suck: there is a reason I don’t go trolling for trim at the nearest bus station, who the hell wants to put up with the behavior of a pubescent trollop?'

Or maybe because you shouldn't be having sex with 12 year olds at all? Or 13 year olds, or 14 year olds? I'm assuming you were referring to 'trollops' that were around Dolores Haze's age.


Suzanne Thackston while i came to a different conclusion, i adore your review. i hope you're writing more than just reviews.


message 43: by Pablo (new)

Pablo absolutely moronic review


ꕥ Ange_Lives_To_Read ꕥ Very entertaining review! My favorite part is how it brings out the "I don't agree with your review so you a.) obviously didn't really read the book; b.) are incapable of understanding the book; and or c.) are a horrible person" crowd.


Augustus Jasmin I laughed out loud as I read this. Far more entertaining than reading the tedious “Lolita.�


message 46: by Danger (new)

Danger Kayutak There are a lot of different opinions on this book, some love it, some hate it. Some say it is smut (although, if smut is your goal, I would bypass this book), and some say it is a literary masterpiece. My small contribution. I can only contribute in a small way because I could not bring myself to finish the book. It is supposed to be clever but how can anyone tell, his sentences run on so long I've lost what he was trying to convey before he gets to the end of one. His prose is all over the place, his narrator is a well-traveled, well-educated idiot. The whole exercise made my head hurt.


message 47: by Gary (new) - rated it 2 stars

Gary Sites I was wondering how to write a review of this book. You did it for me. Thanks.


message 48: by Chitbong (new)

Chitbong "... my own rather sloppy upbringing declares that anyone with a shred of civility offers his adversary a duel rather than attack him unawares, Humbert is a lowly coward of the worst disposition. The ‘hypercivilized� don’t go around bagging 85 pound kids sporting skinned knees from spills at the roller-rink, real men fish for those awesome and voluptuous Amazonians, the women who proudly stand 5�10� or more and have generous curves that modern fabrics fruitlessly struggle to contain from spilling forth in all their fully-developed glory."
Beautifully written, my dude.


message 49: by Mark (new) - added it

Mark Douglas Thanks for this review. After 20 minutes of trying to read this boring book, your review saved me whatever the amount of time to finish this piece of trash would have been.


message 50: by Mark (new) - added it

Mark Douglas PS this book is equivalent to modern shitposting


« previous 1
back to top