writers generally don't like to be asked what their book is trying to say. They will often tell you that everything it is trying to say is in the book.

I think he's a first-rate writer and unfairly criticized. Because of what I've heard and read about Lolita, I thought it'd be a second-rate popular fiction novel but it turned out to be, along with Pale Fire, among the best and most beautiful novels I've ever read.

The smirk on Nabokov's face when that guy said "You can't trust a creative writer to say what he has done."

Nabokov is indeed uncomfortable in this interview, but mostly due to his personal fear that he would be misinterpreted, not from trying to hide some nymphet obsession. Nabokov is infatuated with butterflies and language, not nymphets; that Humbert is a pedophile is just an aspect of the novel that Nabokov came up with in a fit of artistic inspiration and planning. This is like saying that since Charles Kinbote is a stalker, liar, and thief in Pale Fire, then Nabokov must be too.

I love how real and genuinely engaged these reviewers are. You don't see that in modern times.

Probably the most beautifully written book I have ever read.

Someone who equates a character with his creator has never learned to read correctly.

I'd like to say 'thank you' for uploading this piece of footage. Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov is (in my opinion) the master of prose. A writer whose talent continues to be unparalleled.

Nabokov was an absolutely amazing man. More than just his works of literature, all facets of his intelligence are incredibly astounding.

Q: "How are you different from Humbert Humbert?" A: "Humbert doesn't know a hawk from a handbag - I do."

I just listened to the audio book version of Lolita and it's so perfectly read by Jeremy Irons--he captures the nuances of Humbert Humbert's personality impeccably, and his reading of the poetic sequences will break your heart.

When Nabokov said “I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child” I thought he was being modest. The remark was a much more honest self-assessment than I thought.

He's so charismatic, he uses the most beautiful words conceivable

Finally! I get to hear my favorite writer speak! I love how even his story of inspiration for the book is fiction. Thank you so much for finding this and uploading it.

As Trilling says "we cannot trust the creative artist to say what he has done"--Nabokov is smirking in the background as he takes in this most welcome compliment. He thought of himself as an "enchanter" above all else.

Lolita is a difficult subject very well handled - the novel is satisfyingly entertaining to read thanks to its humour.

Perhaps the best, a real master of english.

Vladimir was a genius. Both Lolita and Pale Fire are masterpieces. Good stuff 👌

Nabokov was very nostalgic about his childhood and he wrote a lot about it, you can see how much did he missed that part of his life. So I assume, he did associate himself with Humbert, but not as an old man , but that young boy he was when he met his first love during his stay in the family house in the country All the story is about his dreams to return to those emotions during his childhood and adolescence , his first expreince of love and sex.

Why do they randomly get up and move to the other table?

I was brought here after listening to "Don't stand so close to me"☺. And now I know what they mean by "the Lolita Express".

“The sob in the spine” Nabokov was a genius.

Genius writer. Absolute genius

I've always been in love with Nabokov's "Pale Fire". I'm not sure I've ever found such a gorgeously poetic book so hilarious...and the story is just that (at least to me), absurdly funny. Then, of course, there are many shades of gray retained within the experimental novel. John Shade's name should be telling enough. If you can't tell already, I'm a big Nabokov fan :P

Ah, the art of saying a lot without saying anything.

such an honest chat about the best novel of the 20th century

He's reading his answers from a card :( All his books are so brilliant :)

Lolita has been my favorite novel since I first read it in high school, and it never occurred to me that until now I'd never even seen a picture of him. I confess I'd imagined him being a bit more dashing in the looks department, but the wit is just as I'd pictured it.

My most personal favourite writer! Brilliant in all aspects. I loved "LOLITA", but there are also his magical epic-novel "ADA OR ARDOR", his magnificent and thrilling "PALE FIRE" or his beautifuly cruel "DESPAIR" and "CAMERA OBSCURA". The only novel I've not read yet is "TRANSPARENT THINGS". How is it? His short-stories are aslo something out of this world.

Anyone who thinks that Nabokov and Humbert Humbert are "like minded" are being absolutely absurd. And 90% of the comments under this video are simply idiotic. Most seem to be from Americans trying to find a scandal in here somewhere (as usual). You see the way Lolita is written, it really does feel like the author has purposely created Humbert Humbert to be absolutely as un-relatable as possible, especially in how he pseudo-rationalises everything he does and lies to the reader. The way Lolita is portrayed in the book as being simply the impression Humbert Humbert has of her. Nabokov is so detached and artistically minded with respect to main character in this way, that he simply couldn't have been on Humbert Humbert's side. The fact that he's crafted such an unlikeable character, again, _on purpose,_ shows Nabokov obviously wasn't just trying to... whatever you think he was trying to do if he was himself a pedophile. The work ceases to make any sense if Nabokov were actually sympathetic to Humbert Humbert. He does his damnedest to make sure the reader isn't. Yes he did plenty of research on pedophiles for the creation of his main character, but in the form of academic case studies from psychological journals. Some commentators will actually attempt the pathetic joke: "oh yeah, 'research,' I bet he really enjoyed doing all of that 'research' haha wink wink." And here I must simply ask, do you really think he was sitting there with an academic journal and secretly hiding, I don't know, Nymphet Weekly, behind it like in a cartoon? He took about as much interest in the experts who studied the predator's minds as he did in the predators themselves, but there is no evidence, anywhere, that he took an interest in 'nymphets.' Nabokov was interested, as can be seen throughout his work, in the minds of other people, especially when they were so very different from his own. The subjective experiences of those whom most of us would view as being alien. Distorted realities through distorted eyes. To my own mind, art is about the communication of the subjective experience. Most authors do this by crafting a narrator who views the world much like they themselves do. You can tell when this is happening. Read Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, David Foster Wallace, Proust, all wrote in such a way that their work gives one insight into how they saw the world, and reflects on their understanding of what art _should be_ (I myself have expressed my own views on what I think art _should be_ just now). Incidentally, most praise or criticism directed at these authors stems from the reader either agreeing or disagreeing with their view of the world, or from the agree/disagree-ment of the reader with the author's version of the 'artistic ideal.' Nabokov's own artistic ideal was to make the author as invisible as possible. If you look at his literary criticisms, you will see that he 'detests' when the author projects their views onto the characters, or tries to use them as mere mouthpieces to force a moral or political message. This is why he didn't like most of Tolstoy, but for War and Peace, Anna Karenina and The Death of Ivan Ilyich, which he appreciated because they didn't try to push a Christian narrative as with Tolstoy's other works, but were much more about the characters and their humanity. He disliked all of Dostoevsky for the same reason, as everything he wrote was trying to convey a pro-Christianity message in one way or another- his work literally revolved around it. Nabokov on the other hand, wanted to explore new ground with art. How's about we don't merely try to solve the riddle of [our] humanity with art, but simply highlight that [our] humanity is more of a riddle than even we ourselves would ever want to come to terms with. This is that "tingle" or "sob" in the spine as it were.

Read Dostoyevsky because he is brilliant. He is different from Nabokov in that he doesn't use language poetically, he isn't stylistically that good a writer you could say, but his stories as incredible, absolutely incredible. Start with "Notes From Underground", it's nice and short and sums up Dostoyevsky's style quite well. Or Crime and Punishment for that matter.

His English is not that bad. I think he was more awkward appearing on camera, having to give quick replies to an interviewer's questions. That explains the note cards. Look up Keroac on Steve Allen. He also appears to be incredibly shy. We have to understand that back in the 50's, television was just starting up. Having cameras shoved in your face was anxiety-inducing to people not used to such public exposure Not the same now, where we've embraced the Orwellian Eye a little more.

The Great Master!!!!!!!

I love his smile at 2:48 - it.s the answer to the book.

Genius. I've read many other books he wrote and they are masterpieces specially Pale fire and Camera obscura (Laughter in the dark).

In other words: ''Do you like little girls?'' Nabokov: I like birds more than does Humbert Humbert.

Much is missed in Lolita without the annotated version. 🦋

No better master of words than Nabokov.

Am curious whether anyone recalls Lionel Trilling out of Columbia U ?? Given writers' general disdain for critics, it is telling of Trilling's stature that VN sits on par with him… btw On SoundCloud fans can listen to Nabokov reading the final scene with Quilty and it's quite a sendup of that "semi-animated subhuman trickster" You'll never be able to hear the audiobook reading by Jeremy Irons without a longing that it were VN speaking.

This is amazing footage.

i'm on chapter 16 of the first part and I must say this novel is AWESOME! THe lyrical style is engaging and after having read 2 so-called classics that were complete garbage (Catch 22 and For Whom the Bell Tolls) back to back this was a great change. Both novels were a complete bore, I counted the pages between chapters and was paralyzed by fear when the number rose above 7 with Nabokov I feel the chapters go quickly, and not just because they're mostly short.

@ObeyTheSloth He was a writer, not a public speaker. As he himself stated, "I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child". Therefore perhaps he used those cue cards. : ) I wish I could hear him speaking Russian, his native language... As for touching hearts, he wakes up imagination in his readers; many people lack imagination, while sentimentality is not that rare.

Nabokov's work is dessert to my reads.

trilling & nabokov in the same room. What a scene!!!

VN explains in Strong Opinions, a book collection of interviews, that spontaneous eloquence seems to him miraculous, and that in interviews (many of them? most?) he is in fact reading from note cards, and indeed I believe some pages can be discerned in the clip!

Not many readers are as smart as N And Humbert to be able to work out The intricacies and clues of this tale. At the end of the day. the reader's left With the text as writer and character Vanish into the text, but each reading Sees them with more focus and attention. This Lolita must be read many times.

Армянин и славянка . 😊😊😊😊😊 Я не имею средств наличных, машин, костюмов и домов, хотя мой вид вполне приличный, прочёл три дюжины томов. Я полон сотнями стараний, сплетеньем мыслей и острот, исканьем между осознаний и кладом внутренних красот. Я меховой, как пёс безродный, разумный, тёплый и простой, и справедливый, беспородный с татуированной средой. Так вот позвольте, мисс благая, без роз, колье, богатств иных, средь рестораций, улиц мая Вас пригласить в мир грёз моих!

2:44 Wise words. This is true of all creatives.

wow, terrific, intense and insightful

The 1950s ROCKED!!

наш великий!

Thank you so much for this.

My paperback version is 250 pages even. It reads quickly. The brothers karamazov I read in high school but it was over my head then. i need to go back and reread that one myself.

Indeed, I've noticed that, in the modern literary canon, Pale Fire seems to have caught a phantom wind, pushing it retrospectively toward the front of a lot of critics lists.

This footage is a treasure, a film within a film, or a trial within a trial, and at times it seems that just outside this room a firing squad awaits.

This was when he was in his 50s. There are quite a few pictures of him from his youth and early adulthood that are more 'dashing.'

Can you imagine CBS (or any network) putting on a show like this today? We need more intelligent TV like this.

from William F. Buckley's Eulogy - He reminisces about his declination of my bid to go on Firing Line. It would have taken me two weeks of preparation, he says almost proudly, reminding me of his well-known rule against improvising. Every word he ever spoke before an audience had been written out and memorized, he assured me-isn’t that right, Vera? Well no, he would answer questions in class extemporaneously. Well obviously! He laughed. He could hardly program his students to ask questions to which he had the answers prepared! I demur: His extemporaneous style is fine, just fine; ah, he says, but before an audience, or before one of those . . . television . . . cameras, he would freeze. He ordered a brandy, and in a few minutes we rose, and he and Vera and I walked ever so slowly to the doors. “As long as Western civilization survives,” Christopher Lehmann-Haupt wrote in the Times last Tuesday, “his reputation is safe. Indeed, he will probably emerge as one of the greatest artists our century has produced.” I said goodbye warmly, embracing Vera, taking his hand, knowing that probably I would never see again-never mind the artist-this wonderful human being.

Stephen King actually unalived hundreds of people, that's why he writes so realistically about unaliving people. Instead of discussing Nab's book, let's talk about how I was touched when I was a child. My story is soooo much more important than anything else in this comment section.

As much as I have enjoyed VN's work the only novel that verged on provoking any kind of 'sob in the spine' was Pnin, his most finely drawn and sympathetic character. There is not a single character in 'Lolita' [ and I agree w/ Bloom that VN too often indulged in caricature] that does not verge on the pathetic. It is an especially savage little monster executed with a jewelers eye and misanthropes temperment.

@why760nitro "a book about child molestation" (I am using the exact words you used to describe this book) can help in many ways rather than just being a work of arts. first thing first, it's about knowing and understanding the thoughts going on in Humbert Humbert's mind, because it is extra hard when you try to know how people like him view the world and what leads them to do what they do. Secondly, anything can be 'fine literature' if it can pull out the core of a human being, & of a situation.

i bought the book today and i am very exicited to read it!

Interesting you should say that, I just finished Lolita about a week ago and read Nabokov's feeling about didactic literature and how he felt literature should not impart a moral but rather it should be art to be enjoyed (paraphrasing a lot) I have to say though that i can enjoy both types of literature. I might give Dostoevsky a shot anyway.

3:28 I guess this good reader was Vera.

It's also funny because Nabokov's voice totally changes when he speaks in a different language

uhmfar I am certain you are right [ and I am certain of everything]. In any event,this interview gives me a stronger resolution re my image of Pnin, his kindest offering.

Funny how Wladimir tried to escape from talking about "touching hearts and minds" and "messages". How desperatehe he was rushing to the salutary sofa, but...the attempt feailed, the refugee was caught up and totured by way of listening to the bookenist opinion on "Lolita". After such a cruel punishment Nabokov gave up, and finally began to explain the aim of the book...

A touch of the Philip Larkin about him

Nabokov wrote a few wonderful books no one read, so he provoked the reader with the book which was controversial and won a Nobel Prize. Isn't what American culture is bazed on?

Pierre Berton (the host) conducted the interview well

He is a less eloquent speaker than I expected. Maybe because he is trying to think of interesting phrases and words while simultaneously continuing the flow of dialogue.

Pierre Berton with his trademark bow-tie is the interviewer. A great personality in his own write. There was a time when the CBC was the intended medium. I would like to think that McLuhan was influenced by CBC content when he first wrote about the message. You don't see anything like this nowadays. Oh, and Nabokov is none too shabby either.

Literature as a koan for moral reading. Or maybe not just moral reading, but any reading that supposes meaning, an outside meaning. I like that, good point.

He reminds me of one of Peter Seller's characters in the movie.

I picked up on the fact that this show was Canadian even before I noticed that it was CBC--the host said "aboot."

Pish Posh. Lolita is a cautionary story that is relevant to the course of every love affair, and every marriage; try reading it with both hands next time, Skitzo.

Fascinating interview! The interviewer clearly wants to get VN to own up to something which is not there for VN to own up to. No wonder he disliked interviews in later life.

Th-th-th-that's all folks!

2:13 Can someone tell me the reason why Nabokov moved from his position into another? Very intriguing…

I found Pale Fire [ which I failed to finish] snarky, derivative and endlessly self congratulating. And the unfinshing finshed me re reading anything further. So, I cling to the older stuff; Laughter in the Dark, King, Queen , Knave, The Defense, Pnin and Lolita. VN is, all in all, something of sadistic pupeteer, his well measured but florid style disguising his fear of sleep and dreaming.

The other guy is Lionel Trilling, an important critic.

2:10 So Nabokov just gets up and moves to the couch. C'mon boys, let's get cozy on the setee. Staging for tv shows was still in it's infancy. Newscasters in the early 50s used to get up, walk around, sit on the front desk and use pointers on maps all while reading the news.

Interesting

Lionel Trilling who mistook this work as a love story, totally missing the overwhelming kill count, gets more than one sideways look of suspicion from Nabokov.

GENIUS!

It is true that he was probably reading from notecards, or that he'd memorized his responses. He admits this in Strong Opinions; he calls spontaneous eloquence a miracle and admits that he used notecards in some filmed interview. Anyway, the story about the poor creature drawing its cage is completely invented by VN! Finally, this was the first time I'd heard his voice. whaaat a playa. I was expecting a deeper, richer, more intimidating voice, though..

I am fascinated and disturbed by the anecdote Mr. Nabokov recounts at the end of this video about the artist-ape in the Jardin des Plantes. Does anyone know if the newspaper article Nabokov read can be found?

well....this is ridiculously cool.

What Nabokov has always tried to convey in his lectures and interviews is this: art isn't about something; it is a chaos opening onto mystery. It threatens us as we perform our social script for purposes that we well know are not entirely heroic. "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" Art strangles our rational safety constructs with a similar if more complex connundrum. Society must try to contain the ambiguity art looses upon it, yet in attempting to do so, succeeds only in remaining small.

Jaja, well, thanks! I'll do that as soon as I get that novel. Greetings! PD. by the way? Have you read LOOK AT THE HARLEQUINS? I recommend you that amazing novel, it's just remarkable!

Lolita is a devious and snarky delight I look forward to reading again. But the greatest writer of English prose since Shakespeare? Nabokov is a brilliant stylist, but all too often his characters are deliberate caricatures, verging on the apsychological [ PNIN stands as an exception], pinned to the page, never to surprise but always to satisfy the authors imperious misanthropy. He is, in short, an elegant sadist.

Jajaja well, I understand you perfectly, so is mine. ADA OR ARDOR is probably the most perfect novel I've ever read. ADA and PALE FIRE, actually. You got excellent tastes, I can tell. Greeting! :)

I'm doing a report on this book. Does anyone know how to cite a source card for this book?

Well...I have an EXTREMELY discerning ear (have been the control for the audio component of several neural network studies) but I'll consider your comment. FWIW, I recently took great satisfaction in nailing the fact that Glenn Ford is Canadian (I believe the tip-off was "out"). I guess he should've used Lorne Greene's vocal coach.

@GnawOnAaBrick Well, he did learn it in his childhood, but certainly he didn't write in it for many years.

Peter Sellers based his Clare Quilty on Lionel Trilling's demeanor in this interview

Maybe I have read too many very graphic sex novels, but imo Lolita does not come close in shock value to many other books I've read. Actually, I think I can take out the subject matter and read it as if it were any other kind of book, any other situation. It could be anything. It could be a love story about two heterosexual rhinosori, we don't know. The point is we appreciate the creativity and brilliance of the writer, of the artist.

I was expecting "thick Russian accent"...not a goofy accent.

@carolingianguy And what did you write, besides forum postings? Share an essay, or an article, so we can discuss and grade it here. I love how it 's always a million critics per one talented writer.

What a great clip. Is assume "Mr. Trilling" is Lionel Trilling? B.