• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Vladimir Nabokov: Lolita

steffee said:
Me neither... :) I don't know about Nabokov being more cruel to Humbert the Horrible, than HH was to Lolita, but true or not, it's a fantastic statement for new pondering :) :rolleyes:



The tragic/tragedy stuff reminds me of Educating Rita, by Willy Russell. If you haven't seen the film or read the play then you must do so at once, it's fantastic, and so ideal for this discussion I'm gonna go searching for the bit I need... :D of course, it's English, too, and I believe has a lot of Shakespearen definition of "tragedy", rather than the ancient Greek definition. I dunno, here's where my memory of A level English Lit. fails me, maybe they're the same. :confused:
Click to expand...
Steffee,
That would be very interesting to see!
Sounds like the definitions might be very close, when I think of Lear, Othello, probably also Hamlet. What does A level mean? Your school terminology over there always means totally nothing to me! :eek:
Peder
 
Peder said:
Was VN finessingly cruel to Humbert? I'm not even sure what that means.
Click to expand...

I took it to mean VN was cruel with a finer maybe more precise hand than HH was to Lo. With finess in other words. If something is done with finess, it is more subtly cruel........and therefore more hurtful in the end.

And I'm not sure I agree with that at any rate. Cruelty is cruelty, whether heavy handed or doen with finess. Same outcome.
 
pontalba said:
I took it to mean VN was cruel with a finer maybe more precise hand than HH was to Lo. With finess in other words. If something is done with finess, it is more subtly cruel........and therefore more hurtful in the end.

And I'm not sure I agree with that at any rate. Cruelty is cruelty, whether heavy handed or doen with finess. Same outcome.
Click to expand...

LOL, I read at fitness... duh! I was imagining fitness = more actively, or something...

Educating Rita... no, I don't mean the film is tragic, but Frank, the lecturer gives a lecture on the differences between a tragedy, and tragic. It was brilliant! Though all I remember is he says something like "if a tree fell down onto you and killed you, it would not be a tragedy. It would be tragic, but not a tragedy."

Peder: I wouldn't have a clue how to describe A levels in US terms... you can leave school at age 16, here, after taking O levels (now GCSEs, but ignore that bit) and then A levels between 16-18, which are optional, but a requirement for going to university. You normally do 3, or 4 if you're very bright.

O = ordinary
A = advanced
 
pontalba said:
But, OTOH.....in modern terms tragic 'merely' means "causing or characterized by extreme distress or sorrow /or/ suffering extreme distress or sorrow."
Click to expand...
Pontaba, Steffe,
According to that definition, Lolita and Lolita both qualify as tragic IMO, just as you suggested Steffee. And dare I say Humbert at the end? Or not enough for him to qualify? :rolleyes: /spreading the bait thinly across the trail/
tee hee
Peder
 
Shamelessly stolen from bookcrossing

on page 41 Frank explains to Rita the difference between "tragic" and "tragedy".
"a woman's hair being reduced to an inch of stubble, or the sort of thing you read in the paper that's reported as being tragic, 'Man Killed By Falling Tree', is not a tragedy."
"...in the way that "Macbeth" is a tragedy. Tragedy in dramatic terms is inevitable, pre-ordained. Look, now, even without ever having heard the story of "Macbeth" you wanted to shout out, to warn him and prevent him going on, didn't you? But you wouldn't have been able to stop him would you?"
Click to expand...

The short version. In the film he does a lecture on it too, when he is drunk IIRC and rambles on and on. :)
 
Peder wrote =
I don't know about Nabokov being more cruel to Humbert the Horrible, than HH was to Lolita, but true or not, it's a fantastic statement for new pondering.
Click to expand...

Amis wrote =

However cruel Humbert is to Lolita, Nabokov is crueller to Humbert--finessingly cruel. We all share the narrator's smirk when he begins the sexual-bribes chapter with the following sentence: 'I am now faced with the distasteful task of recording a definite drop in Lolita's morals.' But when the smirk congeals we are left staring at the moral heap that Humbert has become, underneath his arched eyebrow. Irresistible and unforgivable. It is complicated, and unreassuring. Even so, this is how it works.
Click to expand...

Peder, after some ponderation, the way I am understanding Amis's statement is like this: As horrible as it must have been to be the victim of HH's abuse, how much worse is it to actually be the perpetrator, the "moral heap" and the causation of all this grief and horror. It is in this way that I understand VN to have been crueler to HH than he was to Lolita. Wouldn't we all rather be Lo than the despicable Hummy?

The word finesse seems to have been well-chosen in this case, too.

fi·nesse n., v., -nessed, -ness·ing. –n.
1. extreme delicacy or subtlety in action, performance, skill, discrimination, taste, etc.
2. skill in handling a difficult or highly sensitive situation; adroit and artful management: exceptional diplomatic finesse.
3. a trick, artifice, or stratagem.
Click to expand...
 
StillILearn said:
Peder, after some ponderation, the way I am understanding Amis's statement is like this: As horrible as it must have been to be the victim of HH's abuse, how much worse is it to actually be the perpetrator, the "moral heap" and the causation of all this grief and horror. It is in this way that I understand VN to have been crueler to HH than he was to Lolita. Wouldn't we all rather be Lo than the despicable Hummy?
Click to expand...
Still,
I'm not sure about that. Humbert no doubt ranks very low in Amis' eyes, so Amis believes that to be a worse fate than Lo endured. But Humbert doesn't feel exceptionally diminished. Inconvenient to deal with Lo on that basis, but he does it. Lo on the other hand would gladly not deal with him on any basis. So I think the physical cruelty is worse than the imagined cruelty, especially when it is Amis' (or the reader's) imagination, not Humbert's. If Humbert were actually emotionally tormented to a significant degree, then I think there would be a closer argument. Would we prefer Humbert's torment at the end of the book to Lolita's treatment at his hands? That's a tighter decision, and IMO would have been a better example for a question.
So please change my opening sentence to: "I'm not sure about that for the example given."
But thanks definitely for clarifying what was on Amis's mind. :)

Peder
 
Hm, hm, hm.

Okay.

Let me put it this way: Let us say that you are trapped in one of Jasper Fforde's books, and you have to be one of two characters in Lolita.

Who would you rather have to be, Hummy or Lo? (not play the part of, but be?

:rolleyes:
 
Amis' article was interesting, but actually sounded a bit snotty. I didn't care for his tone.
Peder wrote-Humbert no doubt ranks very low in Amis' eyes, so Amis believes that to be a worse fate than Lo endured. But Humbert doesn't feel exceptionally diminished.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, its a much worse fate to be as HH was, and feel guilty and struggle with the terrible problems of how many times can he rape this 12-13-14 year old girl, and scare her with stories of reformatorys. Terrible quandry that one. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And yes, I still feel sorry for Humbert, but nothing gives him the right to treat Lo as he did.
So if Amis thinks that being Humbert, or Humbert's fate is worse than Lolitas......he is on the wrong track. Let him try being Lolita for awhile, I'll lay odds he'd sing a different tune in a hurry.
 
pontalba said:
Amis' article was interesting, but actually sounded a bit snotty. I didn't care for his tone.

Oh yeah, its a much worse fate to be as HH was, and feel guilty and struggle with the terrible problems of how many times can he rape this 12-13-14 year old girl, and scare her with stories of reformatorys. Terrible quandry that one. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And yes, I still feel sorry for Humbert, but nothing gives him the right to treat Lo as he did.
So if Amis thinks that being Humbert, or Humbert's fate is worse than Lolitas......he is on the wrong track. Let him try being Lolita for awhile, I'll lay odds he'd sing a different tune in a hurry.
Click to expand...
Pontalba, Still,
Thank you Pontalba; now I know what the word elitist means, because that was the word I was thinking of using. Now I know that it also means snotty.:D :D :D Perfect equivalence!
But I do think it is elitist (and snotty, and snobby) for Amis to write as he does, hypothetically comparing emotional torment, let us say, to physical torment.
So Still, who would I rather be? Certainly not Humbert if I'm going to get actually executed. That is not a complete answer to your question, but it is the part that I think highligts what I think Amis misses. Humbert did the crime so he's going to have to do the time, no matter how regretful or sorrowful he may feel. "I'm sorry" is not enough to hack it, in terms of punishment for his (or any) crime IMO. Put another way, Amis sounds as if the perpetrator can feel worse than the victim, and I just tend not to buy that. It makes for a clever view in an article but seems divorced from reality. I hope Amis noticed that VN was also actually going to punish Humbert, in addition to just being emotionally cruel to him (if he was).
Peder
 
I guess I'll go back and read it again ... Either I'm missing something or I'm not expressing myself well, or else we :eek: (could it be?) disagree on this point. :rolleyes: :D
 
StillILearn said:
Hm, hm, hm.

Okay.

Let me put it this way: Let us say that you are trapped in one of Jasper Fforde's books, and you have to be one of two characters in Lolita.

Who would you rather have to be, Hummy or Lo? (not play the part of, but be?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Hi Still, again,
This is a more serious, less argumentative answer to your question. If I had to live the life of one of the two characters as they were lived in the book, then I would still not choose Humbert, in order to avoid execution at the end. If I, therefore, had to be Lo then I would rationalize that I could stand anything for a finite period of time rather than be executed.
So, same outcome, but comparing physical torment to physical punishment.
Does that get us any closer? :confused:
Peder
 
Does it have to be either Lolita or Humbert? The choice I mean. Such as it is. Which it isn't IMHO. I mean, who wants to be like Humbert. Even putting the execution aside? No sane person. And Lolita, I don't think so! Its not in my nature to allow someone like Humbert to corner me. I'd have to get away from him, and I wouldn't care where I went as long as it was AWAY from him.

I choose Vivian Darkbloom.

Which come to think of it is exactly what Lolita did.....! But it wouldn't have taken me so long I can guarantee that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top