nataliaantonova

posts about #nataliaantonova more →
A Rave Review Of Lolita
Afghanistan Allows Men to Deny Wives Food For Refusing Sexual Demands • Europe's Peewee Boyz Storm Cheerleading

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

skahammer
08:14 AM

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
So is there no love here for the (fairly abstract) interpretation that the character Lolita, and Humbert's twisted romance with her, is a metaphor for Nabokov's seduction by/infatuation with the English language, which he learned in his tender years and then turned to again as an adult, when history (Bolsheviks, Nazis, etc.) exiled him repeatedly from his Continental milieux?
Reply

skahammer was starred skahammer was unstarred

whynotshesaid
07:22 AM

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
I love this review. Thanks for digging it up and sharing it with us. She touches on one of the reasons I love the book so much, which is that it is a beautifully written book about child sex abuse, one that doesn't shy away from the horrors of it and actually shows how much damage it wrecks on victims' lives.

The review is particularly resonant in light of a personal revelation I had a few days ago, when I realized that three - and possibly more - generations of my family had been seriously fucked up because of child sex abuse. I was molested by a stepgrandfather, who also molested all of his kids (who grew up to struggle with mental health issues and drug abuse), and who was in turn molested by a brother. My mom was molested by her stepfather, and so when I was raped as a child, it forced her to relieve what had happened to her and sent her into a crazy depression that culminated in her loss of custody of me. As for me, being raped and molested at such a young age always left me feeling as though I stood apart and was different from everyone else, and the resulting need to feel accepted and normal led me down some self-destructive paths later in life.

The point is, it fucks with people's lives in real and concrete ways, and Nabokov did a brilliant job of showing that.

As a result I get pissed off when old men like John Derbyshire refer to Lolita as a great love story. It's no more a great love story than my rape was a hot porno, or my mother's molestation was a sweet romance.
Reply

Edited by whynotshesaid at 12/02/09 7:25 AM whynotshesaid was starred whynotshesaid was unstarred

ritualtheory
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
This is a wonderful consideration of what is probably my favorite novel ~ and I first read it at 12 or 13, barely a year after having been assaulted by a middle-aged man. One of the most important points Antonova suggests, if not outright claims, is that Lolita-the-book features a deeply sympathetic, three-dimensional, truly tragic heroine with every bit as much clarity as its profoundly disturbed, self-justifying, but equally three-dimensional narrator. Lolita/Dolores is neither a statistic nor an abstraction; she is real and relatable, and I can confidently say that from firsthand experience. The book wouldn't have moved me nearly as much had the girl in question not reminded me of myself in still-resonant ways.
Reply

ritualtheory was starred ritualtheory was unstarred

MargaretMoony
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
I've always loved "Lolita" because I always felt it was a portrait of a molester, not the portrait of an promiscuous child seductress. I mean, just look at her description in the book! Which is part of the reason I've always hated the contentions of "the Lolita."
Reply

MargaretMoony was starred MargaretMoony was unstarred

whynotshesaid
07:10 AM

@MargaretMoony: The way Lolita has been interpreted to be, like you said, a promiscuous child seductress rather than the victim of a despicable child molester has always pissed me off, even more so once I read the actual book and saw that the only indicators that she was like that came through the eyes of that child molester. I'm sorry but a person would have to be a total dolt not to see that. Which I guess means the world is filled with dolts.
Reply

whynotshesaid was starred whynotshesaid was unstarred

MargaretMoony
12:28 PM

@whynotshesaid: Seriously, makes me soooooooooooo MAD.
Reply

MargaretMoony was starred MargaretMoony was unstarred

MerryLilly
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
I don't have much to say, but I just read Natalia's article in the link, and it's interesting and beautifully written.
Reply

MerryLilly was starred MerryLilly was unstarred

Zombie Ms. Skittles
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
This actually doesn't surprise me particularly. I find redemption in watching Law & Order: SVU where the persecutors are usually punished and punished spectacularly and the kind detectives care what happens.

It's what works for you.
Reply

clevernamehere
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
I'm always surprised when people who have actually read the book (not just seen the movie) see Lolita as anything resembling a sexual aggressor. I even doubt that we're supposed to believe she is experienced because Humphrey tells us right up front that he is a liar.

The idea that Lolita no longer shocks readers makes my stomach turn. The girl was 12, that should always shock us.
Reply

clevernamehere was starred clevernamehere was unstarred

likepenguins
12/01/09

@clevernamehere: I've always seen the real sadness in Lolita is how easy it would be for any little girl to be Lolita. Teenage girls on the cusp of sexual knowledge (though Dolores was a little advanced for her age) often try to flirt with older men. She should have been safe in doing so, but her mom was disinterested and her father figure was a pervert, so no one protected her.

Though I think part of the greatness of Lolita is that Humbert's such a richly-drawn character that we can't find him 100% despicable.
Reply

clevernamehere promoted this comment likepenguins was starred likepenguins was unstarred

Benevolent_Dictatrix (patently absurd)
12/01/09

@clevernamehere: I have to fight the urge to punch anyone who uses the term "Lolita" to mean a young girl who seduces older men.
Reply

clevernamehere
12/01/09

@likepenguins: Oh I find him 100% despicable. I understand why the book is so great, but I don't find him anything but evil.
Reply

clevernamehere was starred clevernamehere was unstarred

likepenguins
12/01/09

@clevernamehere: I can't, because there's also just so much folly there, particularly at the end. 98% despicable, but 2% lolz-worthy for shooting Q after a bare-assed chase around a mansion.
Reply

likepenguins was starred likepenguins was unstarred

bookling
12/01/09

@clevernamehere: I thin anyone who gets that Lolita was the aggressor didn't read the book very carefully. You're right: Humbert is an unreliable narrator, you have to remember that you can't trust him as you're reading. He's so convincing, though, that it's easy to forget. To me, reading Lolita is similar to reading American Psycho, in that both narrators are doing terrible things but fully believe they are justified in doing them, and will make you believe it, too, if you're not careful.
Reply

bookling was starred bookling was unstarred

MargaretMoony
12/01/09

@clevernamehere: This, is has always been part of my problem surronding the book. Not the book itself, but how people are like "Ooooh, it's a story about an over sexualitzed girl and the poor guy she seduced."
Reply

MargaretMoony was starred MargaretMoony was unstarred

Lymed
12/01/09

In reply to A Rave Review Of Lolita
I don't understand the idea that we should hate or ignore a piece of literature because its name has been misappropriated. Lolita the book has little to do with the term "lolita." It is a term that is based not on the work of art itself but on a cursory summary of the plot that misses the actual point of the book.
Reply

Lymed was starred Lymed was unstarred

GreyEminence
12/01/09

@Lymed: Nabokov would HATE the way most people use the term "Lolita" today (i.e. synonymous with "teenage temptress").
Reply

bookling promoted this comment GreyEminence was starred GreyEminence was unstarred

bluebears
12/01/09

@Lymed: exactly.
Reply

bluebears was starred bluebears was unstarred

Hooplehead
08/14/09

In reply to Afghanistan Allows Men to Deny Wives Food For Refusing Sexual Demands • Europe's Peewee Boyz Storm Cheerleading
I don't have anything good to contribute about Afghanistan. Way to take away even the little freedom these ladies have from day to day, you assholes. What's next, just tying them up in a corner and undoing the knots only when they need something done? I wish to Dog there was anything that we could do to change this bullshit.
Reply

Hooplehead was starred Hooplehead was unstarred

Hooplehead
08/14/09

@Hooplehead: And that was before I read about the rape epidemic in the Congo. For the fuck of shit, people, what the hell is wrong with you? Humanity is an epic fail today.
Reply

Hooplehead was starred Hooplehead was unstarred

notheretomakefriends
08/14/09

In reply to Afghanistan Allows Men to Deny Wives Food For Refusing Sexual Demands • Europe's Peewee Boyz Storm Cheerleading
Interestingly enough, back in March the Guardian was also the first publication to break the marital rape law news, and it took a few days for most publications to catch up to them, prompting country leaders to react, and forcing Karzai's people to bury the laws.
Hopefully, this time will be no exception.
Reply

Rosa Scandalosa
08/14/09

In reply to Afghanistan Allows Men to Deny Wives Food For Refusing Sexual Demands • Europe's Peewee Boyz Storm Cheerleading
To borrow a phrase from other Jezzies, for the fuck of shit. Afghanistan lawmakers are just bent on keeping women in fear, aren't they? It's like, "Well, TECHNICALLY we overturned the marital rape laws..." No. Exactly the same as before.

The worst part is that Western powers probably can't do much, if anything, to get these new laws repealed.
Reply

Hooplehead promoted this comment Rosa Scandalosa was starred Rosa Scandalosa was unstarred

Sophie needs to study...damn
08/15/09

@Rosa Scandalosa: The worst part is that there is a culture allows men to exchange food for sex, and when that fails or gets boring, use rape; that laws were enacted to protect such a culture; and that women have very few avenues in which to change such a law within such a deeply misogynistic culture. (Note: I'm not exclusively talking about Afghanistan by any means.)

Western powers not being able to repeal laws of a sovereign nation is not the worst part.
Reply

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

#nataliaantonova

Jezebel

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel

A Rave Review Of Lolita

Afghanistan Allows Men to Deny Wives Food For Refusing Sexual Demands • Europe's Peewee Boyz Storm Cheerleading

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment