Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
This is a literary question that has baffled me for decades: why do literary critics love Nabokov's Lolita? I read it (or most of it) a long time ago (college in the 1970s) and it creeped me out then. To put it crudely, it's the story of a middle-aged pedophile who has a sexual relationship with his 12 or 13-year-old stepdaughter. Yet, Lolita is included on Time's Best 100 English-language novels since 1923, Modern Library's 100 best 20th century novels, and World Library's 100 Best Books of all time. D.G. Myers, a literary critic who contributes regularly to Commentary (and who seems to have a keen sense for good literature), ranks it no. 1.
My question is, given it's subject matter, why? Does it explore universal themes that help us understand the human condition? Does it uplift the reader? Is its prose sublime? Am I completely missing the point of the book because it's an allegory about bigger themes? I honestly don't get it. Help please.
Why not Marilynne Robinson's Gilead or Willa Cather's Death Comes for the Archbishop or My Antonia (all books that go to the heart of the challenges of life and which portray truly good characters in a beautiful, ennobling way)?
- Comment (66)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
I had always thought that The Giving Tree was an allegory of unconditional divine and/or parental love.
Feb '12
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Charlotte
I had always thought thatThe Giving Treewas an allegory of unconditional divine and/or parental love. · 1 hour ago
Parental love is not shown by debasing and destroying oneself to cater to the whim's of one's ungrateful children.
While there is some possibility of merit to the divine love suggestion (God did give all for us, but he didn't do it for our whims), the story was written by a Jewish agnostic who drew cartoons for Playboy and was famous for his black comedy. That doesn't sound like the most likely candidate to write a Christian allegory into a children's book. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shel_Silverstein
Sep '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
When someone asked Georgetown professor Fr James Schall, SJ why read novels? He answered: so we don't live with a lie in our souls.
Dec '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
James Gawron:
Nobokov's Lolita is exactly that. It is an admission of perversity and worse a justification of it.
I thought part of the point of Nabokov's writing is that the "justification" the unreliable narrator gives is obviously faulty. That is, it's no justification at all, and we're supposed to see that.
So I would be more inclined to call it a parody of perversity, not a justification of it.
This is so often the magic 'ticket' today. Just claim it's really a parody and everything is fine. In fact you can then impune the perception of critics. They just aren't sophisticated enough to get it.
When Nobokov wrote Lolita believe me without the prurient interest factor in it, he would have remained an unknown. Instead the book was used as a battering ram to push the sexual revolution through. Amoral laws like Roe v Wade are the result.
Evil is just Evil after all.
Regards,
Jim
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
If you can get ahold of it, I recommend the essay “Lolita, My Mother-in-Law, the Marquis de Sade, and Larry Flynt,” by Norman Podhoretz. It’s in the April 1997 Commentary (#103), and covers a lot of ground on “transgression,” vice, what happens when you run out of taboos, and the line between art, entertainment, pornography, and censorship. (As I recall…it’s been fifteen years.)
A quick Google search doesn’t point to an online copy and it’s behind a paywalled archive at the Commentary website. But you may have better luck than I…
Jun '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Pseudodionysius
When someone asked Georgetown professor Fr James Schall, SJ why read novels? He answered: so we don't live with a lie in our souls. · 2 minutes ago
Pseudo: You're going to have explain that to me. I don't understand what he meant.
Nov '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Look, as a English major and sometimes writer, I appreciate the careful and thoughtful analysis that many of you have given this subject. However, the answer is: because it allows a lot of guys to engage in a taboo sexual fantasy. That's it. End of story.
Feb '12
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
"To put it crudely, it's the story of a middle-aged pedophile who has a sexual relationship with his 12 or 13-year-old stepdaughter. " I think you answered your own question.. voyeurism is always popular with the literarty set.
Apr '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Amy Schley Parental love is not shown by debasing and destroying oneself to cater to the whim's of one's ungrateful children.
While there is some possibility of merit to the divine love suggestion (God did give all for us, but he didn't do it for our whims), the story was written by a Jewish agnostic who drew cartoons for Playboy and was famous for his black comedy. That doesn't sound like the most likely candidate to write a Christian allegory into a children's book. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shel_Silverstein
Yes, I know all about Shel Silverstein. He also wrote some of the most lovely, gentle, touching, whimsical, hilarious, and memorable children's poetry in the history of the English language. So I'm not convinced that creating cartoons for Playboy is a dealbreaker.
(Sorry to hijack, tabula. I'm out.)
May '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
I really like your idea Adrian, but I find it hard to believe given that writing a novel of this caliber takes a lot more time and energy than an essay (re: the Sokal affair, which is so incredibly amusing I think about it to this day when I need a little cheer). Critics like Lolita because it's beautifully written, even if it is about a pervert. Great literature doesn't need to be about great people. We can, if the novelist can see well into the hearts of men, learn as much about human nature by reading a book about a bad person as a good.
That said, I think a lot of modern writers do not know the difference between good and evil. I think Mollie is right - it's been ten years since I read the book, but I did not get the impression Nabokov was immoral.
Aug '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Nice main feed selection in view of the gasping debate slumber party.
Edited on February 23, 2012 at 2:31amWhy are we such devotees of the list ?
Is it laziness ?
Have any of us been asked to help build these lists (sort of like wondering who is home at 2pm to answer polls )?
So 100 english professors have nominated this book in a peripatetic fashion since forever ?
And what do we now know about this group of academics today ?
Sep '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
It has been years since I read Lolita but I can remember being blown away by it. I love Nabokov's prose style and his command of English is awesome considering it was his third language (or even disregarding that).
Another thing thing I reacted to was the weird mix of hypercultured old world intellectual clashing with modernity. In a sense Dolores is the strong one and Humbert is the needy cripple.
One last thing, Humbert is kind of a forerunner of the Dexter character if you'd up know that show. Or Mr. Brooks if you know that movie. A villain with so many extraordinary qualities we end up kind of rooting for him in the end. And because he is a villain when he winds up broken hearted and alone it doesn't seem like such a bad ending.
Edited on February 23, 2012 at 2:38amJun '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
It's not sin to hijack. If it is, it's only a matter of figuring out which circle of hell I'll be consigned to.
Oct '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
tabula rasa
It's not sin to hijack. If it is, it's only a matter of figuring out which circle of hell I'll be consigned to. · 29 minutes ago
The Seventh Evil Ditch (thieves), I would think, Tab. I'll be there to keep you company. And don't say that really would be hell.
Sep '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Bill Walsh: If you can get ahold of it, I recommend the essay “Lolita, My Mother-in-Law, the Marquis de Sade, and Larry Flynt,” by Norman Podhoretz. It’s in the April 1997Commentary (#103), and covers a lot of ground on “transgression,” vice, what happens when you run out of taboos, and the line between art, entertainment, pornography, and censorship. (As I recall…it’s been fifteen years.)
A quick Google search doesn’t point to an online copy and it’s behind a paywalled archive at the Commentary website. But you may have better luck than I… · 2 hours ago
Bill, I remember reading that essay when it came out. I was so enthralled--I was reading it on the subway in NYC and missed my stop. Simply one of the best personal essays I have ever read. My hard copy of that issue of Commentary is somewhere in my basement--now I will go find it.
Apr '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Flagg Taylor
Bill Walsh: If you can get ahold of it, I recommend the essay “Lolita, My Mother-in-Law, the Marquis de Sade, and Larry Flynt,” by Norman Podhoretz. It’s in the April 1997Commentary (#103), and covers a lot of ground on “transgression,” vice, what happens when you run out of taboos, and the line between art, entertainment, pornography, and censorship. (As I recall…it’s been fifteen years.)
A quick Google search doesn’t point to an online copy and it’s behind a paywalled archive at the Commentary website. But you may have better luck than I… · 2 hours ago
Bill, I remember reading that essay when it came out. I was so enthralled--I was reading it on the subway in NYC and missed my stop. Simply one of the best personal essays I have ever read. My hard copy of that issue of Commentary is somewhere in my basement--now I will go find it. · 15 minutes ago
ditto
Apr '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
I love Lolita!
I've never read a literary criticism of it, so I don't know why the "experts" do or do not like it.
I don't think it's ever explicitly stated, but Humber is European. He's some type of pseudo-euro nobility. He's well educated and sophisticated and decadent. Basically, he's the degeneracy of Western civilization.
Lolita is a beautiful barbarian. She's gorgeous to look at but also vulgar, ignorant, and shallow. Lolita is America.
I think Nabokov was playing with ideas about the decadence of our western culture, it's purposelessness, and perversion. Also, he's exploring the what comes after the fall concept. He's showing us through Lolita how he views American culture, it's vulnerabilities and limitations.
Humbert's obsession with Lolita seems almost like a pathetic longing for the return of some ancient time - he calls her a goddess and talks in mythology like terms about her constantly. He's trying to capture the barbarian youth to recapture the ancient goddess. He's an exhausted (in cultural terms) European looking toward the New World hoping to recapture the mystery of life and culture in the beautiful barbarian.
Mar '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Jim- Lolita's defenders aren't claiming that it's a parody; they're reading the novel as it was very clearly meant to be read. It doesn't take much "sophistication" to get the book, but it might require some maturity.
Mar '11
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Doug Lee: "However, the answer is: because it allows a lot of guys to engage in a taboo sexual fantasy. That's it. End of story."Good point, and I hope that Mollie Hemingway cops to it.
Dec '10
Re: Help. Why Do Critics Love Lolita?
Russians writers have a pathos which eludes my appreciation.