Vanessa Hernandez
17 November 2010
Intro Writing/Lit
Like many first readers of Lolita, I thought the text solely told the tale of a pedophile’s adventure. Little did I know that beneath its mask, the story has scarcely anything to do with Humbert’s perversions. It instead, plays mind-games with the readers by having a crazed killer narrate an obvious plot in order to mask a deeper (still undiscovered) hidden plot.
I must admit, that I was at first played by Humbert’s coy distractions, before our class discussion. I found myself buying his cheesy sincerity and lustful comments without ever thinking that whom I was listening to is a manipulative fictional character. After realizing that Humbert isn’t to be trusted, “ I discovered there was an endless source of robust enjoyment in trifling with physiatrists; cunningly leading them on; never letting you see that you know all tricks of the trade; inventing for them elaborate dreams…” (34) I read Lolita with a different attitude. I was determined to not be played again.
Sadly though, I had been played through the first half of the story, not by Humbert by Nabokov who’s intentions I find unclear. I feel like I have been given a game with only the first sentence of the directions to work with; sure I have learned to not trust Humbert, and look for the “’real plot” which is visible in the “gaps” and “holes” in the narrative” (26 Intro) but I don’t know where to look for “gaps” and “holes” since the story appears consistent throughout. How can one play a game when they don’t know where to even start?
Minus the headache of trying to be smart and play along with Nabokov’s games, I found the first half of Lolita to be an interesting read. Its continuous switching between third and first person helped to remind me that Humbert, despite his thoughts, is not in control of his actions but a higher deity (Nabokov). The meta-fiction genre is an interesting one that I hadn’t known prior to taking this class, but one I intend on continuing in reading.
I'm very glad you're keeping all of this in mind, Vanessa. And I think, as you finish the book, some of these questions will be answered for you.
ReplyDeleteThe most important stuff you said to keep in mind: 1) that HH is a "manipulative fictional character"--the "fictional" part being REALLY important here. 2) your focus on this quote, " I discovered there was an endless source of robust enjoyment in trifling with psychiatrists; cunningly leading them on; never letting you see that you know all tricks of the trade; inventing for them elaborate dreams…”--also very important for us to see that HH sees us as psychiatrists. Now think about why Nabokov would want to differentiate readers from psychiatrists? (they are similar in many ways).
And you're right--reading this book feels like being "given a game with only the first sentence of the directions to work with." But with a careful eye, you'll see that Nabokov is giving us the rules as we go along. He doesn't give them all at once, but pay attention. He's speaking to you.
good work=9
e