Books That Made a Difference:
The Language of Lolita
Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.
Did you ever read a book that just struck you dumb with its artistry? Traveling back in time, I have to say the first book that had such an impact on me was Vladimir Nabokov‘s Lolita. Such was the power of Nabokov’s artistry with words that I stayed with a book that otherwise wouldn’t have earned a spot on my list of top literary works. Humbert Humbert is pathetic (in addition to being a pedophile). Lolita is selfish (which, granted, is not entirely her fault), Quilty is creepy (made even more so by Peter Seller’s portrayal in the film), and Charlotte is simply a sacrificial character—removed from the picture in order to advance the plot.
I’m all for anti-heroes and dark comedies; it’s just that this particular set of characters, and this particular plot, wouldn’t usually intrigue me. But then there’s that voice of the author. Such thoughts and observations he puts in pathetic Humbert’s head! Such provocative language he gives to Humbert as our antihero thinks of his lovely Lolita.
Anyone who has experienced the longing of obsessive love (lust!) can relate some to Humbert, I know. We can’t condone his obsession, but we can understand the feeling of obsession, and, even, the disappointment when obsession does not lead to seduction. But I don’t think this is what makes the work universally loved and adored. No, it’s the language. It’s the mastery of Nabokov’s writing. It’s this Russian author’s love affair with English. Because when all is said and done, and we have turned the last page, we realize that it is we, the readers, who have been seduced.
So, what do you think of Lolita? Am I just wrong about my take? And what books have you read that seduced you with their exceptional artistry?
Thank you for joining our conversation on Okie Reads. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
I don’t remember Lolita being dense, per se, but “weird” seems like a good description. It certainly was a groundbreaker, and that can appear odd at the time.
I do know that I read Lolita during a time in my life (college and post college years) where I thought I should be reading books that were good for my mind. (What a laugh!) In the process, I discovered some real gems——Thomas Hardy’s Return of the Native, Lolita, and the plays of Shaw, O’Neil, Hellman, Wilde, and Ebsen. I also had some painful experiences, notably with Henry James’ Washington Square, which was the first book I didn’t finish reading. (Yeah, I was one of those oddballs who thought they should finish every book they started. This was eons before Nancy Pearl’s Rule of 50. Well, Washington Square put an end to that nonsense!)
As far as teenage girls making the world go ’round, I will take your word for it, Sadie—although I have suspected this was the case for some time now. LOL
It’s weird when you start thinking about something and the next thing you know you happen on an article about the very thing. I was going to comment on your Lolita saying the book for me is Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. Every word is precise and just the way it should be. I still recall his description of the “eyes of Doctor T.H Eckleburg”, looming over the gray landscape, blue and gigantic. And then I happened on this article, also perfect and precise.
http://www.themillions.com/2010/08/the-great-gatsby-revisited.html
Thanks for the comment, Kitty. You know, my niece just adores The Great Gatsby, and she said she tries to read it once a year.
I will say I like re-reading passages of certain books for the artistry of the words, or the idea that is convened. But generally, for me, re-reading books is not a particularly successful activity. The problem? I want to re-create that feeling I felt when I was reading the book the first time, and it is just never the same. I know that sounds weird: how could it ever be the same? But for whatever reason, I always leave a re-read feeling a little let down.
Now, having said that, I *do* re-read favorite short stories, and never seem to have the feeling of disappointment. What’s that all about?!?
Intriguing! I’ve never read Lolita.It always seemed so weird and dense. Can there really be that much to say about young teenage girls? Of course, then I see most pop culture and think ‘yes of course there is, teenage girls make the world go round.’
I will have to read Lolita now!