he's so convincing

@@lisemagdalen he's bery intelligent too, that kind of intelligence psychopaths have, the power to convince others and manipulate them, so you will feel bad for him and think it is just normal what he did

Well you cannot seduce a child. You can rape a child. But a child cannot consent. The character of Dolores is also based on a true life 11 year old girl who was kidnapped and abused shortly before it was written. While beautifully written, I do not feel that discussion goes far enough into how disturbing it is

@szs voc to be fair, the story features an unreliable narrator who constantly tricks you into feeling sympathy for him, and distracts you from thinking about what's really happening up until the end

@szs voc I'm the person who said that! I think that too, I just also think sometimes use the wrong language to make their point.

agreed

+musgrave68 I do not waste time trying to explain it to those kind of people. Let them miss the greatest fruits of the human race.

musgrave68 It truly is beautiful writing, people are missing out

speedypizza I really don’t think you should be judging people who genuinely have a hard time reading about certain topics

I definitively agree with you as I, personally,consider this book as a brilliant masterpiece in the world literature.

The music written for the movie is beautiful and suits Lolita so much

True

i'm everywhere u brat They thought the book would sell better Blondes have more fun theory.

His first lost lover was blonde

Your beautifulll...

@ThatOneAsianBroChick Just wanted to know, is there any similarity with movie Lolita 1997 and the book? I mean i found something else in the movie. Like the girl was also there who use to do that with her father for hiding or demanding something. I mean the nature of lolita in the movie was not good though. She like to make scene with various man as she describe herself in the movie.

@@rafirehad7462 Lolita is not responsible or to be blamed for anything that happened to her. The narrator of the story in the book is unreliable, which is not a commonly used literary device but it means you cannot trust his point of view on anything. So what you are told about her, is what he thinks about her, and it's unreliable

@@Gilliebeany Brother My question was so simple. Is that how lolita in the book as shown in the movie. Look, I'm talking base on the movie ok, as her father had a bad eye on Lolita. And lolita also did some cheap move with her father. If you have seen the movie then let me remind you of the car scene, while her father went to take her from camp. There I can find a lot of scenes where her father did not interest to do anything but she wanted to do that cause she needed something from him. I'm not telling that all the blame goes to lolita but she didn't seem very good girl in the movie. I just want to know, Is that how, lolita behaves in the book?

@@rafirehad7462 no. I answered your question the first time and if you can't read deeper into the movie than that to see that's not what she actually did, it's what he thinks in order to justify it, I can't help you

Perhaps you've haven't experienced a weird old guy watching your every move from 10 yo to 11 yo? My father would certainly have beaten the crap out of him but I was afraid of the power a teacher had over us. Despite the book being "beautifully written" it's still too painful to delve into a creeps mind whether he can write well or not. Perhaps a Nazi has written a piece that is well crafted yet the horrors of the Nazi regime deter us from having any sympathy or love of what is essentially abuse of other human beings? In Nabokov's work we see the victimization of a child - having been there it's too awful for words no matter how well crafted or devised the book may be. It's the subject matter specifically - amazed the book was allowed circulation when Lady Chatterly was banned.

SAME!!

what was it? i've never read it before, just curious

Hello Kim! I feel like my response might be pathetically small in comparison to your wonderfully thoughtful comment. I have been reading this over and thinking what you have said through. I really appreciate you for sharing your thoughts on Lolita and Nabokov with me. I feel like I read it too fast and too focused on the language to really catch the more nuanced things that you have pointed out. I feel like I would definitely benefit from rereading Lolita. I would like to look for those moments where the narrative falls apart when Humbert is cruel. I also never thought of Lolita as a strong female character. But the more I think about it, the more I have to agree with you. I'd also like to think more about Lolita while rereading. What Nabokov novel would you recommend reading next?

Emily Cait I definitely didn't think of Lolita as a strong character the first couple of times I read the novel, but my most recent reading has me seeing things that way. It's definitely an interesting question to pose and debate. I'm sure nuanced arguments could be upheld on either side. If you have a bit of time on your hands or are looking for a novel that you can go through with a fine-toothed comb, I would point you in the direction of "Pale Fire" which is a total mind-f*ck of a book. The prose is glistening and magical and you're likely to get completely swept under its current, but the story itself is also a dizzying puzzle. It comprises an epic poem written by the character John Shade, a respected poet and scholar, and a forward, commentary, and index by the character Charles Kinbote, a man who claims to be a friend of Shade's but also a man about whom we don't have much objective information. Kinbote has taken it upon himself to provide the reader with a commentary on the epic poem to help said reader understand what the poem is really about. Through his commentary an entirely new story (or multiple stories) develop and the reader is left to puzzle out who Shade, Kinbote, and the other characters really are and what exactly happened on each level of the story. It can be hard to keep all of the details straight, especially considering that Kinbote is on-par with Humbert in terms of unreliability (that's pretty obvious from the beginning, so no spoilers), so it's definitely the kind of novel you'll want to mark up and put sticky notes in. There's a lot of debate about how you should read it. Some people say to read it straight through, some say to read the poem first then all of the commentary. I would recommend reading the poem first and allowing yourself to wonder at the beautiful language and the story unfolding therein. Then I would suggest you read the commentary, but be sure to constantly flip back and reference the poem so you don't lose track of what the poem says (according to you) and what Kinbote says about what the poem says. Also, don't forget to read the index because it's important (and often amusing) to see how Kinbote catalogs everything. I don't want to give away too much and it's an incredibly difficult story to piece together and recount anyway, so I'll leave it there. The language used in this work is every bit as dazzling as the language used in "Lolita," but it will take a lot of close reading and time to work it all out, so don't rush yourself. Also, keep your eyes out for holes in the narrative such as the ones I mentioned in "Lolita"--moments when the narrator (Kinbote) overlooks things. There are many different planes in the story, and it's important to keep in mind that Kinbote's narration exists on a separate plane from the plot he recounts. There is a lot of humanity in the book and moments of great tenderness and sorrow, but you have to look past the narration in order to see it sometimes. Also, snow, glass, and jewel imagery. So good. The character John Shade is also speculated to be a fictional Robert Frost, and there's lots of writing about the possible meanings/implications of that on the interwebs if you're interested, though it's spoilery. If you don't have tons of time, I would suggest reading his memoir "Speak, Memory." He tells about his life from childhood until the moment when he sets sail for America in 1940. Not only is it beautifully written, but I think it provides a good base for understanding the rest of his work--why he writes the way he does, why he is preoccupied with certain subjects, what those subjects are, etc. It's a fantastic meditation on the mechanics of memory and the language is incredibly sensory (he also speaks specifically about his synethesia and how that affects what he sees). Keep your eyes pealed for imagery of jewels, glass, light, butterflies, and chess. All of those feature in this memoir as well as most of his other works (I haven't read his entire oeuvre yet, so I can't claim that they feature in all of his works). Some of it can seem a little rambling like when he goes on and on about genealogy (Side note: in his books and literary criticism he always tries to connect himself to Puskin because he's a total fanboy and it's amusing to observe), but there's a lot of good material to be found where he meditates on things like cruelty and his regrets about how he treated some people at different points throughout his life. He also spends a lot of time thinking about the value of human existence. Because it's a memoir, there's a lot of interplay between fact and fiction, so watch out for moments when reality seems to melt into something more fantastical. One last note on the book: Watch out for the way he addresses the reader as "you." He is writing to a specific "you" and you begin to realize more and more throughout the book who that "you" is. It's a very intimate memoir (because of the "you") and so the reading experience is quite special. Once you've finished, you should be primed to tackle more of his work with a greater understanding of who he was and the contexts in which he wrote. Happy reading! And let me know how it goes! If you're interested in nabokovian criticism, commentary or discussion, this page has lots of free stuff www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/

Thank you Kim for your incredibly thorough recommendations! I think I might start with "Speak Fire" just because it might be nice to read more of Nabokov's work while knowing more about him. Although "Pale Fire" sounds really cool! :) I'm excited to read both! Hopefully that is something that I can make happen this year.

That was DOPE great share!

I haven't seen the movies, but I can picture Jeremy Irons and I can imagine that being pretty scary. I guess I should find the film adaptation and watch it and see Irons in action. :P I hope you do read Lolita at some point. It was very beautifully written, which might just make the disturbing content worth it.

I'm curious if rereading it now I'd be more critical of Humbert. I recently rewatched the video and I can see past me get so jazzed about the beautiful writing that I did feel sympathy. Honestly not sure if I would 5 years later... :s

@@EmilyCait you should totally give it a shot! :)

We Have Always Lived in the Castle sounds amazing (I Googled it!) I have added it to my TBR. If I complete my read 5, maybe I'll buy it!

Emily Cait You won't regret it!

Emily Cait ii

Emily Cait could you please review a tomb for boris davidovich by danilo kis

me haha

Me too lol

me wahahahahdkwkdjksks

me

Thank you!

It's true that the relationship between Humbert and Lolita might be construed as romantic kinda sorta, but I always felt like there were moments where Lolita makes her discomfort pretty clear. I felt like Humbert himself acknowledge that what he was doing was wrong quite often. But maybe these moments that I saw as clear moments of discomfort, that broke anything 'romantic' about the interactions between Humbert and Lolita, could be interpreted differently. Maybe a young person reading Lolita might not see these moments as problematic. I would be curious to hear what younger people reading Lolita have to say about it.

The title is misleading: the book isn't about Lolita per se. The 'relationship', if it can even be called that, is just an exercise in projection by Humbert of his child love onto Dolores. Dolores fits the physical ideal of Annabelle, but her personality is actually off-putting to Humbert, and the same goes for Dolores. The relationship was doomed to fail, for one because Humbert wouldn't really be satisfied with a facsimile of the object of his affection, but mostly because the two didn't fit together at all. The book should be read as a romantic tragedy, but the romance isn't between Dolores and Humbert.

Thanks for watching, Sean :)

+cher bear Definitely. Read it.

If you know you're very immature for your age, such concepts will not be easy for you to understand or think critically about. But you're now probably 15 ish so go right ahead since I bet you did a lot of growing up in those two years.

It was! I like to move my furniture around, so if you go through my old videos you will see the bookshelves in different places. :P

You are an idiot...

Either you're just here posturing to be a "good man" or you're too much of a dimwit to understand other human beings. This is a great, great story because it's so true to life.

Thanks :)

I'm glad you are excited to read Lolita. It's a beautifully written novel. I feel like the writing is relatively light (I find the writing in a lot of 'classics' to be dense) and there are some really beautiful, chilling, and vivid lines throughout. Definitely worth giving a read, in my opinion. :)

Thanks for watching :)

It is! :)

I have! I keep my read books separate from my unread books :)

I dislike them... Possibly because mine is old (AKA five years old -- ancient in tech years) and barely functions or keeps a charge :P But that's the kind of sucky thing with tech: by the time you've purchased the newest gadget it's already out of date. Any book on my ereader is barely accessible to me half the time because of lack of updates to support my "outdated" device. I get that ebooks are cheaper, more accessible to folks buying books in languages not easily found in their own country, and easier to store if one doesn't have space. They are also great for students making notes -- being able to search a digital document is a blessing of a feature. (I recently heard about a PhD student at my old uni who may have to rewrite a chapter of their dissertation because they kept physical notes alongside their reading and now can't find/cite a key quotation that they ended up building their argument around. I bet they wish that they had done digital reading/note keeping on a device.) I also understand that there in an incredible amount of privilege to be able to buy and store physical books in the way that I do. I would never advocate for folks not using ereaders/digital books, but I personally avoid them when I can. Hopefully that makes sense?

@@EmilyCait helps a lot.. my desire for wanting one is because you don't need lighting.. but I love the feel of a paperback! I also love the idea of having a paperback collection along my wall &I love the price of paperbacks! And for the cost of a kindle I can buy a lot of used paperbacks! I have over 800 books on overdrive.com lol But that's only ebooks..

Courtenay Gray Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the relationship in Lolita! :) I really liked how you talked about young girls preferring older men (and that desire being okay) but that is not something that Lolita desires (which makes it questionable? I don't want to put words in your mouth, so correct me if I've summarized that incorrectly :P). And I think that might be an important distinction to make while reading Lolita. I think it's important to realize the validity of Lolita's sexual desire and curiosity. Although I'm not sure I can get behind a relationship between a young person Lolita's age and an adult. I'm comfortable with the idea that girls Lolita's age have sexual desires and that those desires might be for older people. Lolita's curiosity and her engagement in the mind game seems perfectly fine to me, it's the fact that Humbert Humbert embraced Lolita's 'experiment' of seduction (I don't know how I want to phrase this 100%, but that's my best attempt) that causes me discomfort.

Oh no I know that isn't what she desires which is why I was confused as to what she was actually after. It seems that way at first but you begin to tell that she doesn't like older men :) Personally, age is just a number for me and for quite a few people. I guess, in response to his partaking, I would say that well in a way, she flirted with him and he got the wrong message and genuinely thought she liked him so he was interested. Granted he already has his sights set on her when he first saw her. Regardless of her age, people play mind games all of the time so if somebody starts to heavily flirt and well engage with all of the things they took part in, you are going to think that they like you. I think also the fact that he didn't expect her to like him and so when she showed signs of liking him, that pleased him.

Sweet Lolita She was a playful happy kid who liked everybody and was naturally rebellious toward her mother which Humbert used to his advantage. Predatator extrodaire as Nabokov would say as well as a baboon, his other word for Humbert.

+Aj Koorstra The story is controversial but the writing style amazing

Yeah I get what you are saying! !

The Coffee Nut While I enjoyed Lolita, I agree that it could have worked well as a novella.

Not a good book? Pff