Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (the novel) - Research Paper Example

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov Vladimir Nabokov dove wholeheartedly into controversy when he penned the one-of-a-kind classic ‘Lolita’. The novel revolves around the whims of a pedophiliac man and his obsession with an adolescent girl. Conventionally, this very idea would bring out the worst of repulsiveness and disgust on part of the reader. However, the awkward, self conscious, haunted by guilt man is not damned in entirety by the reader, who does indeed by the end of the plot begin to feel some sense of sympathy for the character. The sympathetic feelings that the reader experiences have nothing to do with the inner workings of the readers mind. This is owed in large part to the way the book is written. The story is being told as a narrative from the point of view of Humbert. It is his words, his whims and his actions that are portrayed through his point of view. As the reader generally progresses through the book he feels more and more like a confidant, someone who has been let onto a great secret, one which disgusts him, but one which he cannot pry himself away from either. Early on in the novel Humbert tells the readers that he “want[s] sympathy,” from his audience, “even though I find it so hard to behave sympathetically” (32). From the very start, it is Humbert who the reader is most focused on. Some critics have argued that Nabokov wrote the book in the first person narrative deliberately. The style of the book automatically pulls at the sympathetic cords of the readers hearts and they cannot help but feel something for Humbert. “The first person narrative makes Humbert more enduring… Nabokov wrote “the Vane Sisters,” a short story in which he perfected his use of the kind of first-person narrator who does not know that he expresses much more than he means to say. To some extent, “the vane sisters,’ is a “firing practice” for Lolita” (Toker 201). As the plot evolves we will notice that Humbert really is equipped with every excuse possible to justify, or in part defend, his actions. This is one of the main reasons the readers do not set fire to the book. It is in fact the redeeming qualities of Humbert’s character that demand some sympathy on part of the reader. Brian Boyd went onto describe the same in his biographical account of Vladimir Nabokov’s life, “Nabokov grants Humbert every argument that the child-abuser could want, and more: psychological trauma in childhood (the Anabel Leigh story); the arbitrariness of any prohibition against sex with the young when other times, other cultures have allowed it; his efforts at restraint, before Lolita and until Lolita seduces him; her having already lost her virginity; the transcendent poetry of nymphet love etc” (Boyd 231). At the end of it all, the book very successfully produces a cathartic result where the reader awakes from long spans of sympathetic thoughts for Humbert due to a temporary suspension of judgment. The very compassion we feel for Humbert stems from the narration; the sympathetic self-projection that was able to elicit pity on part of the reader. The confused feeling of sympathy also arises because of the manipulation of language on part of Humbert in his narration. His actions are dressed up in heavy metaphors, beautiful prose and great imagery. He does not just come right out and say exactly how he feels, or exactly what he did. The reader is given a story which is caught in between the lines of a veil of words which tone down the severity of Humbert’s actions. And the reader is aware of the skill with which he can manipulate and use the language as soon he sees some of the first few lines of the book, “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” (9). The lines are extremely poetic. They have a beautiful rhythmic ring and tell the reader an instant tale of the beauty of the pet name Humbert has made up for Dolores Haze, while showing us how important she was to him. Lolita is Humbert’s entire world, in a nutshell. Sin and soul, life and loin; he has placed her in almost every dimension of his life. Humbert is a self-proclaimed poet with “…only words to play with,” an exclamation that should make the reader suspicious of his reliability as he manipulates the prose to achieve the desired effect on the reader (32). Humbert regularly goes onto to talk about things at length through metaphors. In one instance he describes himself as “…one of those inflated pale spiders you see in old gardens. Sitting in the middle of a luminous web and giving little jerks to this or that strand. My web is spread all over the house as I listen from my chair where I sit like a wily wizard” (49). His illustrative use of language confuses and distracts the reader. McGinn describes the situation best when he writes, “One has to keep reminding oneself of what is really happening here” (McGinn). This intricate channel of metaphors and prose actually muddles reality and changes things without really changing them. In this new version of the story, one will find a more sympathetic point of view towards Humbert despite the true nature of his crimes. It is a constant struggle on part of the reader that will at times become oblivious to the heinous actions undertaken by Humbert and feel sorry for him. His pedophiliac tendency will go ignored in the face of his passion and love because he has dressed up his perverted nature in the cloak of his emotions, through his words. The reader has to work his/her way through a multitude of layers and coatings of figurative language in order to get a glimpse of the actual event that took place. And is likely to become distracted or swayed in the process. Anyone who has ever experienced love can relate to the crushing blow of Lolita’s disinterest that continually haunts Humbert. His actions, although degenerate, are based on true feelings for Lolita. He has to bargain and plead for her affections, of which he only manages to secure the physical parts and nothing of the emotional. For Humbert his obsession is indeed a nightmare. He is stuck in his past, his present ignores him and he has no real hope for achieving any level of the love he seeks anytime in the near future. Elizabeth Janeway noted his plight in her review, “Through two years and two lengthy circuits of the American scene, Humbert spirals down the levels of his inferno. Possessed, insatiable, he can never stop wanting Lolita because he never really has her, he has only her body. In the end, his punishment matches his crime. Lolita runs off with a monster; Humbert attempts to track them, bounces into a sanitarium, bounces out and lives in despair, until Dolly, who used to be Lolita, finds him…” (Times.com/books). Even after he finds the object of his obsession, Humbert is still lost. Declaring his love gets him nowhere. He loves her even as she stands before him, a completely different human being. And for Humbert the result of his actions stands glaring at him; a heavily pregnant and abandoned Lolita. In his rage over his condition our hubristic hero then marches off to kill Quilty, only after he has handed over very large sums to help Lolita. A very important factor that draws the reader into some form of sympathy for Humbert is the character of Quilty. By nature both are pedophiles, yet they are extremely, if not completely, different. Humbert’s feelings for Lolita, quite literally destroy him. His obsession strikes the reader as pure perversion, but one cannot help but sympathize, if not empathize; with the helplessness he feels when he loses her after Quilty snatches her from him. Quilty is, in a sense, everything that Humbert is not. The only thing that ties the two characters is their perverse taste for young girls. The aesthetic sense that holds Humbert away from any real harmful actions (before Lolita) does nothing for Quilty. Lolita is not Quilty’s first victim and was most likely not the last. In Lolita: Parody and the Pursuit of Beauty, Gabriel Josipovici rightly observed, “Lacking the power to love, Quilty can escape unhurt from the relationship that destroys Humbert. For him Lolita, like all human beings, is an object to be used for his own amusement and thrown away if she won’t play the games he devises for her…” (Josipovici 212). Quilty is in a sense an anti-thesis to everything Humbert stands for. While Humbert treats Lolita like something to be worshipped, Quilty treats her like another toy that he just bought and can through away at any given point in time. Humbert Humbert wished to keep Lolita all to herself because she was his first and only indulgence. He destroyed her childhood because of his lust; however, Quilty did not understand her value as Humbert did. While Humbert laments over his actions and even has remorse, Quilty shows a lack of interest and treats the matter as inconsequential (Maurice Charney 165). Humbert Humbert is not a monster. The man is a sexual pervert and a killer. However, he is not an evil demented human being. He did not rape, or go around seducing prepubescent girls in dark corners under the safe net of shadows. He looks around, but never tries to grab, until of course Lolita. His self-loathing and self-justifications do in fact have a huge impact on the reader. We see a man who was driven by his need to fill a void in his life. Anyone and everyone can relate to the feeling of needing something that will complete everything. In Humbert’s case what he needed was extremely immoral; however, it is what makes his character what it is – direly human. There is the fact that Lolita never appears to be any kind of victim; her character does not beg any emotions of pity on the part of the reader, as Humbert’s does. After she is done with Humbert, she moves onto Quilty, after she is done there she goes and gets pregnant elsewhere; this was not an altogether innocent character (if at all). Humbert’s plea for sympathy does have some effect on the reader, simply because at the end of it all he still holds Lolita close to his heart, nymphet or no nymphet. It is for her broken heart that he commits murder. His love is his only redeeming quality, the only thing that makes him a little less pathetic in the eyes of the reader. It is as though he is helpless, his feelings are a force he cannot fight against. In the end, the fictional character succeeds to an extent in his endeavors, which began as he tried to aestheticize his relationship with Lolita at the beginning of his narration. Work cited Josipovici, Gabriel. The world and the book: a study of modern fiction: 1971 Charney, Maurice. Sexual fiction: 1981 Janeway, Elizabeth. The Tragedy of Man Driven by Desire: 1958 http://www.times.com/books/97/03/02/lifetimes/nab-r-lolita.html’ Boyd, Brian. Vladimir Nabokov: The American Years: 1993 McGinn, Colin. The Meaning and Morality of Lolita: (1999). Read More