Response 9

by Alora Young

Lolita

This book is creepy. It was one of the first conclusions I came to, and it just got more and more dominant the further I read. It’s creepy for obvious reasons – the theme of pedophilia and the fact that Lolita seemingly reciprocates Humbert’s feelings, for example. But the scariest thing is the fact that I like Humbert, as a character, but especially as a narrator. It’s easy to forget that the fact that he’s only sexually attracted to girls between the ages of 9 and 14 is so, so wrong. I forget because he’s funny. He’s very clever. And he presents us on multiple occasions with logical, credible sounding information on why his sexual preferences are actually quite… normal.

He says, “I found myself maturing amid a civilisation which allows a man of twenty-five to court a girl of sixteen but not a girl of twelve.” “Hugh Broughton, a writer of controversy in the reign of James the First has proved that Rahab was a harlot at ten years of age.” “Marriage and cohabitation before the age of puberty are still not uncommon in certain East Indian providences. Lepcha old men of eighty copulate with girls of eight, and nobody minds.” And the worst part is we know it’s true. We know that in the past, a middle-aged man marrying a ten year old girl was acceptable, and more than that, it was common. While part of our minds flinch, and tell us these relationships are disgusting, the other part is stumbling over itself with a, “But, uhm, he’s right though…”

Without wanting to, we accept his “malheurs” (French; misfortunes) of being helplessly attracted to young girls, and we focus on how amusing and intelligent he is. We forget that his story should make us feel ill, and we even find ourselves hoping for his happiness – wanting Lolita to love him back. Then, inevitably, we realise where this character’s charm has lead us and we find ourselves disgusted again, more at ourselves than at poor Humbert Humbert, who we still feel eerily sympathetic for. After our short in-class discussion, I’m even more aware of how naive Humbert’s skill as an unreliable, manipulative narrator has made me, for I failed to recognize how much of Humbert’s story may in fact, be as fictionalised as the very world Nabokov has created for him.

I already thought Nabokov had to be a genius for leading me, and I’m sure every other reader of Lolita, to almost condone Humbert’s behaviour. Then, of course, I realised (thanks to Apple’s in-depth annotations) how every word in this novel truly does mean something. People say that about most of the important literary works in history, but sometimes you’re not sure how true it is. Lolita not only written beautifully, it’s written carefully. I now have the utmost respect for Nabokov, and will forever be fascinated by this novel and its genius.