-
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
- Thread starter Love4OneAnother
- Start date
pontalba
Well-Known Member
Breaca sorry to poop out like that 
, but this old broad had had it! Yes it is 5:30 A.M. And yes, I just peeked in to see if y'all had cleaned up the place after I left.............hrruuummppphhh!
Ya missed a corner.
Now I am going back to sleep, as all persons of any sense at all should be doing!
Yes, Peder I mean You.
Look forward to part three of your defense............
, but this old broad had had it! Yes it is 5:30 A.M. And yes, I just peeked in to see if y'all had cleaned up the place after I left.............hrruuummppphhh!Ya missed a corner.
Now I am going back to sleep, as all persons of any sense at all should be doing!
Yes, Peder I mean You.
Look forward to part three of your defense............
StillILearn
New Member
StillI, straightening her peruke, stumbles through the rubble.
"Hello?"
"Hello?"
Peder
Well-Known Member
Morning, all,
Hm, well. I see the judge, prosecutor, jury and hangman assembling.
Just remember, if you decide to hang someone, you hang my client, not me!
Only a few more papers to shuffle, then collect my fee, and then I'll lay it on ya'.
/yawning still. Pardon me!/
Peder
Hm, well. I see the judge, prosecutor, jury and hangman assembling.
Just remember, if you decide to hang someone, you hang my client, not me!
Only a few more papers to shuffle, then collect my fee, and then I'll lay it on ya'.
/yawning still. Pardon me!/
Peder
Peder
Well-Known Member
The Defense Part 3 The Close
The jury seems to be all in place and ready to go.
So, now, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we reach the point where it all becomes clear.
I do of course realize that you may still wonder if there might be some truth in the novel. Intelligent people such as yourselves would of course wonder such a thing. So I will take the liberty of explaining and clarifying certain scenes in greater detail
The ideas for many scenes did, in fact, arise from Mr. Himble's personal life. Where else does an author turn for ideas, especially an author who has difficulty creating them?
The prosecution will call your attention to a famous couch scene and you will be shocked, shocked I tell you. But what are the facts? Simply put, father and daughter, in real life, as they always do on Sunday mornings, were quietly sitting on the couch engaged in their favorite Sunday activities. She was sitting on one end of the couch in her pretty Alice-in-Wonderland frock, with her feet tucked up under her, reading Jane Eyre. He was sitting at the opposite end of the couch reading Marcel Proust, in French.
Just then he had the original inspiration for his novel -- the manuscript that you will soon be reading! It was an inspiration that he describes as transporting him into the longest sustained joy he ever experienced, as scene after scene for the novel unfolded in his mind. Transcribed to the novel, with intimations of a major amount of fictional sex larded on, the event becomes the lurid version that the prosecution will show you. Nothing whatever happened in real life between Himble and Dorito, OF COURSE!
The prosecution will also tell you of a supposedly notorious scene in a room in a hotel called The Entangled Lovers. The origin of that scene actually took place in the coffee shop of the hotel -- he having his decaf, yeck, and she having a glass of warm milk with sugar in it as a nightcap. The further fact is that father and daughter both enjoy playing board games together (checkers, Oligopoly, etc) and this particular evening sweet Little Dor wanted to show him a new game she had learned at camp. He feigned ignorance of the game and she was astounded to hear that her father had never heard of tic-tac-toe. So she started showing him how to play and, not too surprisingly, she won. Which led him to exclaim, "I didn't defeat her. She defeated me." Twisted through the prismatic prosecution lens of added overtones of sexuality, you will hear and read a much more lurid tale from the prosecution. But just remember, ladies and gentlen of the jury, the game was tic-tac-toe.
And as for Little Dor crying every night, which you will surely hear from the prosecution. I will tell you, that was of course true! She missed her departed loving mother tremendously during that tour of the US. And her father could hear her every night through the paper-thin hotel walls that separated their rooms, at least when torrents of Niagara Falls were not gushing down. And when sex is larded on gratuitously, especially by fictionally placing them both in the same room, then you get the false evidence that the prosecution will be showing you.
So, are you going to convict a man because he was inspired to write a book, or because his daughter cried inconsolably for her mother, or because they played tic-tac-toe together? The answer is obvious.
The answer should also be obvious because the prosecution offers no evidence that any sex crimes were ever committed. They don't have any evidence! No DNA, no eyewitness testimony, no ear witness testimony thorugh flimsy hotel walls, no stained blue dresses. Nothing! So even they -- that woman there -- can bring no charge! But they want to tell you all about these lurid, and fictional, scenes in order to improperly sway you to convict Mr. Himble of murder.
And I said we would come back to that. Yes it is true that Mr. Himble tracked down the kidnapper of his daughter, one Mr. E. Ville, and shot him dead, eventually. But ladies and gentlemen of the jury I think you will believe that E. Ville, E. or Ee for short, needed killing. He fully deserved it, and had he survived, he is the one who would be on trial here for actual pornographic crimes with children, not Mr. Himble for imaginary crimes that are figments of the imagination. But the prosecution feels they have to prosecute someone, so they pick Mr. Himble and we have to go through this charade.
So, when you read of sex, say to yourself, "Fiction, fiction, Fiction!"
And when you read of love for his daughter, say to yourself, "True, true, true!"
And when you read of erasing E. Ville, say to yourself, "Goody, goody, goody!"
Oh yes, I mentioned my client was charged with two crimes. The second one is trespassing on private property on the side of a hill. I can't believe you will punish an aggrieved father for that, but it deserves a defense anyway. His car ran off the side of the road and ended up in the ditch. In his grief at his daughter's situation, he found a quiet place to sit in the shade and think of what might have been, if she had not been kidnapped by the man he had just shot. You will, of course, allow a parent their heartfelt grief, shooting included.
The fact that the prosecution has to back up the murder charge with a trespassing charge shows you how little they expect to get a conviction for murder. But they want to come away with something. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, give them nothing!
Acquit Mr. Himble! And set my client free!
The jury seems to be all in place and ready to go.
So, now, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we reach the point where it all becomes clear.
I do of course realize that you may still wonder if there might be some truth in the novel. Intelligent people such as yourselves would of course wonder such a thing. So I will take the liberty of explaining and clarifying certain scenes in greater detail
The ideas for many scenes did, in fact, arise from Mr. Himble's personal life. Where else does an author turn for ideas, especially an author who has difficulty creating them?
The prosecution will call your attention to a famous couch scene and you will be shocked, shocked I tell you. But what are the facts? Simply put, father and daughter, in real life, as they always do on Sunday mornings, were quietly sitting on the couch engaged in their favorite Sunday activities. She was sitting on one end of the couch in her pretty Alice-in-Wonderland frock, with her feet tucked up under her, reading Jane Eyre. He was sitting at the opposite end of the couch reading Marcel Proust, in French.
Just then he had the original inspiration for his novel -- the manuscript that you will soon be reading! It was an inspiration that he describes as transporting him into the longest sustained joy he ever experienced, as scene after scene for the novel unfolded in his mind. Transcribed to the novel, with intimations of a major amount of fictional sex larded on, the event becomes the lurid version that the prosecution will show you. Nothing whatever happened in real life between Himble and Dorito, OF COURSE!
The prosecution will also tell you of a supposedly notorious scene in a room in a hotel called The Entangled Lovers. The origin of that scene actually took place in the coffee shop of the hotel -- he having his decaf, yeck, and she having a glass of warm milk with sugar in it as a nightcap. The further fact is that father and daughter both enjoy playing board games together (checkers, Oligopoly, etc) and this particular evening sweet Little Dor wanted to show him a new game she had learned at camp. He feigned ignorance of the game and she was astounded to hear that her father had never heard of tic-tac-toe. So she started showing him how to play and, not too surprisingly, she won. Which led him to exclaim, "I didn't defeat her. She defeated me." Twisted through the prismatic prosecution lens of added overtones of sexuality, you will hear and read a much more lurid tale from the prosecution. But just remember, ladies and gentlen of the jury, the game was tic-tac-toe.
And as for Little Dor crying every night, which you will surely hear from the prosecution. I will tell you, that was of course true! She missed her departed loving mother tremendously during that tour of the US. And her father could hear her every night through the paper-thin hotel walls that separated their rooms, at least when torrents of Niagara Falls were not gushing down. And when sex is larded on gratuitously, especially by fictionally placing them both in the same room, then you get the false evidence that the prosecution will be showing you.
So, are you going to convict a man because he was inspired to write a book, or because his daughter cried inconsolably for her mother, or because they played tic-tac-toe together? The answer is obvious.
The answer should also be obvious because the prosecution offers no evidence that any sex crimes were ever committed. They don't have any evidence! No DNA, no eyewitness testimony, no ear witness testimony thorugh flimsy hotel walls, no stained blue dresses. Nothing! So even they -- that woman there -- can bring no charge! But they want to tell you all about these lurid, and fictional, scenes in order to improperly sway you to convict Mr. Himble of murder.
And I said we would come back to that. Yes it is true that Mr. Himble tracked down the kidnapper of his daughter, one Mr. E. Ville, and shot him dead, eventually. But ladies and gentlemen of the jury I think you will believe that E. Ville, E. or Ee for short, needed killing. He fully deserved it, and had he survived, he is the one who would be on trial here for actual pornographic crimes with children, not Mr. Himble for imaginary crimes that are figments of the imagination. But the prosecution feels they have to prosecute someone, so they pick Mr. Himble and we have to go through this charade.
So, when you read of sex, say to yourself, "Fiction, fiction, Fiction!"
And when you read of love for his daughter, say to yourself, "True, true, true!"
And when you read of erasing E. Ville, say to yourself, "Goody, goody, goody!"
Oh yes, I mentioned my client was charged with two crimes. The second one is trespassing on private property on the side of a hill. I can't believe you will punish an aggrieved father for that, but it deserves a defense anyway. His car ran off the side of the road and ended up in the ditch. In his grief at his daughter's situation, he found a quiet place to sit in the shade and think of what might have been, if she had not been kidnapped by the man he had just shot. You will, of course, allow a parent their heartfelt grief, shooting included.
The fact that the prosecution has to back up the murder charge with a trespassing charge shows you how little they expect to get a conviction for murder. But they want to come away with something. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, give them nothing!
Acquit Mr. Himble! And set my client free!
pontalba
Well-Known Member
If Mr. Himble has such a limited creative brain pan, surely he could not have 'created' such, um, steamy realistic sessions as are depicted in said novel. i.e. the 'couch scene'. So repugnant to parents of normal stripe.
Ah Hah! Unknown to defense counsel, we have thru the hocus pocus of time travel obtained a DNA sample, a sample so damning to the defendant that I cannot even state the nature and source of said stain in the presence of the mixed company of the Jurors!
Let it suffice to say that bodily fluids were exchanged.... between familial sources.Yes, the answer is blatantly obvious!
Just icing on the cake of defendants general creepiness. Plus of course his blatant disregard for the sanctity of Private Property.
To quote a famous, but for obvious reasons unnamed source, whose insight into this very issue is irreproachable..........{p.308 in text in question}:
Now, I turn to my learned, still learning collegue to close the Closeing
.
Peder
Well-Known Member
/phoooof/
I am worn out, Pontalba, and incapable of contesting anything else. That went on for much longer than I ever expected, and I am now contrite and willing to sit here and take my medicine. So, prosecution, call your witnesses! I think we'll throw ourselves on the mercy of the jury rather than even trying to cross examine.
I mean .....
Peder
I am worn out, Pontalba, and incapable of contesting anything else. That went on for much longer than I ever expected,
and I am now contrite and willing to sit here and take my medicine. So, prosecution, call your witnesses! I think we'll throw ourselves on the mercy of the jury rather than even trying to cross examine.I mean .....
Peder
pontalba
Well-Known Member
That'll be the Day! More likely you are plotting and planning another avenue of attack!
I know how you slippery defense attorneys are..... I am still waiting for my learned partner in crime, I mean my collegue, to appear and take up the slack.
Mercy Me!
Why shucks, I swear........if I live to be five hunnert....
seriously peder...bloody marvelous defense.....
Peder
Well-Known Member
Pontalba,pontalba said:I am still waiting for my learned partner in crime, I mean my collegue, to appear and take up the slack.
I'm waiting for her to show up also. After snookering me into doing a defense! Last time I rise to the bait like that again. Sheesh!
But glad you liked it a teensy weensy bit down there at the bottom of your post. It makes me smiley all over.
Now if I could just stop yawning......
Probably be awake at midnight again
And with no de- to -fense.
Peder
PS But I did accidentally catch a neato minuscule allusion in Lolita, which circles out to Pale Fire, then to Brian Boyd, then out into literature at large, and then finally back into Lolita again. Now to find all that (again), because it shows why the detective work never ends. Rereading just Lolita is not enough.
Plus I am enjoying Speak Memory immensely. Have you started Vera?P.
Peder
Well-Known Member
Pontalbapontalba said:Teensy huh?! I was attempting to be subtle and hoping my co-council would not notice! OY!
ROTFALOL!
I did notice that it was not teensy weensy at all, and I assure you that your kind thought was very fully appreciated. /blushing/ And writing the defense was fun of a sort, but it was still a LOT of editing and typing that I'll be very careful about doing again. /hears forum members saying thank heaven/
After Speak Memory, if not before, I'll be in the mood for some lighter reading also, for a very definite change of pace.
Now where is that prosecutor?!
(Putting lipstick on, I know!)
Peder