Banned Book Club: Lolita By Vladimir Nabokov - Review

[@jezzbooks]

This book has possibly the best use of the Unreliable Narrator that I've ever seen in my life. I'm sad society has failed it as much and as severely as it has.

[@bannedbookclub]

Agree, it was scary to be in Humbert's head but never boring. One of the most exciting parts of the book is that unreliability and the constant dissonance it makes between his warped view and reality. It forces you to fill in a lot of the gaps yourself, almost like the book is making you complicit with the whole story--never experienced that in any other book. But ya, I'm still amazed how many people can't make it through after you suggest it to them. We're forgetting how to separate ideology from art.

[@NicolePoliskey]

So very true. My best advice to those who love books and writers, read all of the books that people tell you not to. Those are the most beautifully written. Lolita is disturbing but it is his view as the narrator which makes it so genius.

[@williammartin2593]

Yes! VN explains in the introduction that HH made up the story to torment his psychiatrist, then died. VN admired Poe and hid the truth in plain sight. Careless readers race over this to get to the juicy parts.. Which don't exist.

[@Merlandese]

100%! I feel the same way when people sympathize with Tyler Durden, or idolize Patrick Bateman. Lolita might be the most misunderstood of the lot. I still can't believe people can read of a book where a dude is a creeper, an abuser, a murderer, institutionalized, drugged people, cares nothing of anyone but himself, and then still believe what he says about love.

[@alejandrofranco1925]

@@Merlandese If we only have Humbert's testimony and no independent source to contrast it, how do you determine Humbert is an unreliable narrator?

[@rooruffneck]

Correction: Humbert does not say he is innocent. He says he is guilty and should be killed. That's significant. Yes, you're right, he's trying to pad his fall and seduce the reader. But he acknowledges directly that he ruined a child's life.

[@marcosuliseshernandez1562]

He says 35 years of prision, not death penalty. But it's true, he never claims his inocence

[@rooruffneck]

@@marcosuliseshernandez1562 Right, thanks for that correction. While I'll definitely never understand why some people can refer to this novel unqualifiedly as 'a great love story,' I'll find it almost as difficult to understand how it can be read as if HH is only lying when he speaks of his recognition that he terrified and abused Dolores, and that he tore her childhood to shreds.

[@marcosuliseshernandez1562]

@@rooruffneck i think similar as you, but there are many moments trough out the book when Humbert says that Lo is trying to seduce him, there are even contradictions in his narration of the things bcs in one hand Humbert recognize that he is abusing Dolores but at the same time he is always feeling that she is doing things to seduce him. Is an interesting part of the book, sorry if there is something wrong in this messge, English is not my first lenguage

[@rooruffneck]

@@marcosuliseshernandez1562 Your English is wonderful! Yes, so much of what makes Lolita such an interesting puzzle (and infuriatingly fun) is seeing how Humbert is always trying to get himself off the hook. Even his genuine recognition of the abuse he did to her is used as a seduction of the reader, an attempt to make us love him, forgive him, and always keep him united with his Lolita, for eternity. It's despicable and so clever and brilliant. I can't ever really get my mind around what a masterpiece this book is.

[@takalla9877]

@@rooruffneck Don't mean to necro a thread, but yeah, the "great" in "great love story" could definitely raise some eyebrows. I think it's definitely a love story; BUT IT'S A TWISTED LOVE STORY, in the sense that Humbert definitely portrays it as such, but you have to constantly see through the unreliable narrator's antics

[@ahb6049]

I have been looking for this kind of content for so long, just people discussing books. love it!

[@bannedbookclub]

Glad you’ve found us. 🥂

[@thaneknight]

My take away is that Lolita is a story told from the villain's point of view, he's a murderer, rapist and a pedophile.He doesn't intend evil but is seduced into evil acts and takes us with him and steals our innocence in a way like he does with Lolita.

[@smoothcritical1]

My take away is that Nabokov (Vladimir Vladimirovich) was a paedophile author writing about his paedophilic fantasies through his paedophile protagonist Humbert Humbert.

[@rabbitss11]

Lolita obviously tackles a taboo subject but he handles it with extreme skill and talent, only the prurient and small-minded fail to understand its extraordinary skill and even wit, it's an extraordinary achievement irrespective of its subject matter

[@eugeniasolomon1441]

One thing is that you only have Humbert's point of view..so did Dolores really looked at him? Or the insinuation only happened in his sick head?

[@SusanTalbot-c3q]

What a refreshing take on this, in my view, the greatest novel ever. I would have liked more clarity about Nabokov's view of his work. He claimed repeatedly that yes, what Humbert does to Lo is terrible, but that it is also a love story. Interesting too is that he also calls it a mystery! Quilty's role is only hinted at throughout via sly clues, often in other languages, only revealed by Lo herself toward the end, where SHE sums up her feelings about Humbert: "you broke my life"! I recommend reading Lolita every year, especially an annotated version. Each time I delve into Humbert's "mad new dream world", I experience a different reaction, from disgust to pity. It's a masterpiece.

[@holden190]

A gorgeously written novel for sure.

[@mohammadjubeh7125]

Amazing video, i read the book a while back and was looking for this kind of discussion... great work overall, the discussion was deep, the room and video taking were all an aesthetic and each one of you has a unique character that adds a layer to the whole episode... i really wish I could pay attention to my lectures this long.

[@bannedbookclub]

That’s high praise … we thank you!

[@darkwitnesslxx]

Humbert was in love with Annabel. He's trying to replace Annabel. He's trying to change Dolores into Amnabel. If she had lived into her 20's and Humbert had spent his time trying to replace her as she was then, we'd sympathize with him. Media is full of characters, of both sexes, who lost their first loves and couldnt move past them and they are always sympathized with, even though its still a toxic situation.

[@koulacuneo737]

You guys are amazing with your beautiful words of describing the stories from these amazing books. It makes you want to find out more from the author! Thank you

[@johnpjones182]

Donald Sutherland and Blanche Baker (daughter of Carroll) starred in Edward Albee's 1981 Broadway play of "Lolita", which closed after 12 performances. There was also a 1994 opera based on the novel with score by Rodion Shchedrin. Still waiting for a sitcom version.

[@havefunbesafe]

Did anybody else notice the reoccurring theme of constipation with Humbert?

[@dylanwolf]

Humbert is NOT an unreliable narrator. I disagree about Humbert being an "unreliable" narrator. On the contrary, I would say that he is a surprisingly honest narrator. In his testimony he doesn't flinch from telling us about incidents and scenes that portray him in the worst light. He also often admits his depravity and claims to suffer from guilt at his debauchery in transient moments of moral self-awareness. And, we are left in no doubt about Humbert's internal justifications for his paedophilic actions and the thoughts, desires, obsessions and fantasies that drive his despicable crime. Humbert never tries to fool us into thinking that he has ever considered, even for one second, what is best for Dolores, or to convince us that he ever treated her as a human being, let alone as a highly vulnerable child. Humbert's narration never gives us the slightest glimpse of Dolores as a person, she is openly portrayed in the text solely as an object for his personal sexual gratification. Is Humbert's testimony naive or a reflection of his sociopathic personality that is unable to show empathy for others? I don't think he hides anything, aside from avoiding any exaggeratedly salacious or graphic details of his sexual assaults on Dolores - the description of Humbert's initial masturbatory experience with Dolores' legs on his lap and subsequent rapes are elegantly handled by Nabokov. Humbert's paedophiliac mind convinces him by delusion that his actions are morally acceptable, understandable and excusable, and that society's rejection of his obsessive sexual compulsions are unreasonable. His delusion is apparent to the point of suggesting that "his Lolita" instigated the seduction of him - this is not unreliable narration, it is the truth as his perverted mind, or more accurately perhaps, his memory, perceives and assimilates the truth. He is not persuading us to believe something that he believes to be untrue. Nabokov's mastery of language, constantly playful, challenging, insightful, erudite, inspiring is sensational; he really was a writer of immense talent, and in his second language too. As a reader, I would suggest he has no better in the construction of luxurious, ornate, engaging and satisfying writing.

[@donovanb8247]

I mean the whole book is an appeal to the jury of his murder trial, I don’t think you can read it as anything other than an appeal to the people in charge of his literal coming to justice. Beyond that he glosses over spending MONTHS in a sanitarium several times and never fully explained why he was sent there. There’s an amnesiac albino in one part.

[@dylanwolf]

@@donovanb8247 Good points. Thank you.

[@Merlandese]

I get what you mean by this, although I think the term "unreliable narrator" here is more semantic. There are multiple occasions when Humbert contradicts himself, and many times when he says he can't rely on his own memory like mixing up dates or forgetting Taxovich's name. He even admits near the end how dishonest he has been to himself, how much he has tried not to see, and how much of the story he has carefully coded. In the truest sense of the word, you can't rely on everything he says, even if he's not exactly trying to be deceptive. There is the type of unreliable narrator who is definitely lying, and there is the type who simply cannot be relied upon to tell the events realistically. So yeah, I think the term "unreliable narrator" does work here, but you're right in pointing out how it's not the same type of unreliability we have become accustomed to.

[@dylanwolf]

@@Merlandese Thank you Merlandese. You've said it better than I did.

[@SusanTalbot-c3q]

I agree with almost all of this, except the idea that his view of Lo is "solely" for sex. He takes great pains to educate her and interest her in things he likes, such as tennis, chess, movies and literature. He is often very let down and seemingly hurt that she has almost no interest in these. He was deluded to fancy her as a life partner, but he clearly wants more than sex.

[@hihey8746]

amazing video. im súper surprised that you all aren’t more popular

[@bannedbookclub]

That is very kind! We are working hard to continue to push out more content like this. Thank you for subscribing!

[@lilymariereads]

hey! something worth knowing is that the discussions of "annabel lee" refer to the edgar allen poe poem of the same name, likely not to a love that humbert actually lost!

[@holden190]

They didn’t catch that? It’s so well-known.

[@Fawn-hv7mx]

Lolita, the novel, is an aesthetic experience par excellence, second to none. Beyond morality and even love itself.

[@holden190]

Most gorgeously written novel ever. His prose is like poetry.

[@jakovljubcic2874]

I just discovered your channel and I’m so happy I did. You guys are amazing :) Thank you for this beautiful analysis of Lolita ❤

[@bannedbookclub]

Glad you liked it! welcome to the club

[@vanessadelarosa429]

What a great discussion please keep them going!

[@aklcraigc]

Nice discussion. It's my favorite book, I must have read it 5 times. You guys should do Nabokov's 'Ada' - it's a more difficult book, but perhaps more rewarding.

[@bannedbookclub]

Haven’t heard of this one! We will have to check it out. We would like to cover another Nabokov book soon! Glad to hear you love this novel, it easily became one of our favorites as well 🥰

[@nenadmilenkovic-panic6079]

22:19 "If you wan't a good prose style you could always count on a killer" Or something like that

[@El_papa_de_Rambo]

No, it is a book about European vs American culture. Why people keep missing that?

[@nenadmilenkovic-panic6079]

Among so many things. And I would say that also.it's sort of road novel that shows the decadence of US society.

[@ashleygriffin]

For a further deep dive from a cinematic perspective: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gKW4hWaYj9Rmrrc

[@dollvains]

"did he really love Lolita, or was it just something for his own selfish character" UM HELLO it's painfully obvious that ITS LITERALLY ALL HIS OWN SELFISH DESTROYING OF A CHILDS INNOCENCE like did we read the same book ? JESUS i can't

[@bannedbookclub]

agree with you there 99% - but how do you account for the later parts of the book where Humbert still cares about her after she's gone, and is willing to murder someone for hurting her? I think most of it was blatant selfishness yes, but there's evidence that something more complicated was going on there too. Part of what made the book so interesting.

[@dollvains]

@@bannedbookclub Obsession. that's it he is utterly obsessed with his own twisted idea of "lolita" which is not a name anyone in her life ever used for her it was his weird pet name for her because that is exactly what he viewed her as, A possession. Possession and Obsession does not equal Love. Obsession can lead to those violent tendencies not Love.

[@donovanb8247]

@@dollvainsI think your argument is more correct than it is incorrect but I think the act of parsing out how H.H truly feels is part of the art of the book. Are we to say he has no guilt at all? Does HE believe he loves her? What do we want to believe about him and why? These sorts of ideas get tossed under the rug when you draw a hard line like that.

[@mey2mey]

The beginning and the majority of the book yes, this was the case, but in the end he learns to actually love her and realized her loved her wrong previously.

[@Merlandese]

@@bannedbookclub This comes down to definitions of love, for sure. To me, a textbook toxic relationship is a guy who doesn't care about your personal wants and needs, but will beat up your next boyfriend (Scott Pilgrim creates a whole plot around this). If I saw this happening even with my adult friends, I don't think I'd be tempted to call it real love. The same applies here, more so.

[@Cameron.Robert]

Excited for Pale Fire. If Lolita had the winking and nodding at the reader the whole time, PF has got the binoculars out. VVN's constant self awareness makes it hard for me; I dont believe anything he says (as narrator/author) and he is a constant manipulator. His fascination with butterflies only leans in to this control obsession. Nabokov is the living incarnation of Dostoyevsky's Svidrigailov from C&P: hyper-intelligent and evil to the core.

[@bannedbookclub]

Interesting thought. He seemed pretty docile and nice in all the footage we saw, but I could see how there might be something else lurking underneath. There is a pronounced manipulative quality in Lolita's prose that is uncomfortable and interesting at once - but at the time I wrote that off mostly as Humberts characterization. Will be interesting to see how much of that carries over in Pale Fire. Glad you're excited, we are too!

[@PERRYOL]

I loved the discussion on this book. Ive never understood the people that read it and somehow came away thinking Lolita was anything other than an extreme victim. Ive also never heard any reader understand the sublime painting describing scene the way i did. This is one that i read when i was way too young- about 10 or so- i used to read through my very literary older sister's intense library. And re-read almost annually. I almost got a bit personally offended on the accusation that the prose could ever be seen as 'purple'. Its way too efficient of a book for that descriptor.

[@robyn905]

I think the one line of the book that convinced me there was atleast an ounce of real love was all the way at the end. “I hope you will love your baby. I hope it will be a boy” And there it is again, that song rhythm that Nabokov does so well…

[@happymood2278]

A better film adaptation than that of Kubrick's is the one in which Jeremy Irons slays as H.H. Adrian Lyne created a masterpiece.

[@bannedbookclub]

We have yet to see it!! It looks really good. But man, there’s something so uncomfortable watching it played out compared to the book… will have to watch it one of these days. 👏

[@cookiestar2702]

Agree. It's perfectly cast. The actor who plays Lolita nails it, as if she was made for the role.

[@cookiestar2702]

@@bannedbookclub , somehow, the entire uncomfortable aspect does not happen. Cast is Jeremy Irons, Melanie Griffin ( the Mom,) the girl who plays Lolita will stay in your memory 4ever. She is simply Lolita!!!! Please please give it a whirl It hits every thing in the book as if pages come to life.

[@rooruffneck]

​@@bannedbookclub The movies might be entertaining (I hate them), but they can't do anything that the novel does. That said, if you listen to Iron's reading of the novel....perfection.

[@Merlandese]

Great discussion, guys. Commenting for algo.

[@kenhur9800]

This is great but please stop interrupting each other. I want to hear everything from all of you

[@VincentDotZip]

this has nothing to do with the book or any analysis. i just wanted to say the guy on the left looks like christian bale and thats really cool

[@Long_Shoulder]

Solid conversation and interesting perspectives but god please stop talking over the girl every time she speaks

[@PoetNoPoems]

A wild thought about the book is how he may have never met his Lolita but have made another one because he was supposed to be staying with another family with a young daughter but their house burned down and he was diverted to the Lolita of the book.

[@Ana-wb7fp]

y’all are cool, thank you for this.

[@user-kl8vr8io3b]

ребята...отличное обсуждение книги набокова...❤❤❤

[@vlaekershner7305]

Interesting discussion, I think also that the novel has an allegorical component with the old, corrupt, sophisticated European falling in love with young, vibrant, dumb America and its version of the English language.

[@sweaterstripes6295]

okay i do think that kubrick’s version does fail the story quite a bit, but i think it was part hays code and part kubrick viewing the story as a romance instead of a tragedy

[@holden190]

Nabokov wrote a screenplay that Kubrick would not use. The film credits him and Nabokov with the screenplay, though Nabokov said only 10% of his writing made it to the screen.

[@charliejones3973]

This video is amazing!

[@bannedbookclub]

Thank you! 😘

[@user-kl8vr8io3b]

Это наверное самое подробное описание книги Лолита...

[@Watashime39]

I think if you know a little bit about telling a story or writing, you get right away that Humbert is a parody and an unreliable narrator, I mean... I don't know, I saw navokov's intention as quite the opposite as trying to deffend this, much less being autobio xddddd it is clear satire, critique and, most of all, a tragedy

[@Watashime39]

So, yeah, I think the things you say at the beguinning... Maybe i am wrong, but are unnecessary.

[@holden190]

I agree. It’s parody.

[@alejandrofranco1925]

where is the guy on the right from?

[@Mement0o]

An author writes about murder in detail and no one thinks of him as being an actual murderer, but of course when sex is involved everyone gets their pitchforks.

[@smoothcritical1]

If someone wrote about murder in detail in many of his books, with murder the key subject, I would take from that that they enjoyed fantasising about murder. Just as Nabokov enjoyed fantasising about sex with young girls, which he spent most of his life writing about.

[@holden190]

@@smoothcritical1that’s totally false!

[@smoothcritical1]

@@holden190 "That's not true! That's impossible!"

[@thomasjpuleo8112]

Someone needs to rewrite the novel from Jean Farlow’s perspective.

[@athiefinthenight6894]

idk why you guys dont have more subs? maybe have a clips channel?

[@hollywooda111]

Why does the guy on the left KEEP! interrupting the woman?, really annoying.

[@happinesstan]

He's an author. How many families has Stephen King butchered?

[@ShilgenVens]

30:53, talk about beautiful pros

[@Transform108]

This review would be better if you did not constantly inject your obvious cultural opinion on this type of attraction. Apart from that Humbert really is a mix of Sociopathic issues ... and some ehhh attraction issues. These are separate things. One is root of his paranoia, frustrations, anti social issues. The other is the root of his love and desire. And then there is the loyalty - which I think is genuine. Excellent commentary on the hazards of love. So many of us marry our mothers/fathers - the early love - or ourselves. An endless theatre for many.

[@dasharush1949]

very bad analyses of the book. And even stupid speculation of Nabokov as a writer. Terrible superficial approach.

[@ilostmyearpodsbtwiamhannah815]

Not that deep u prolly just don’t read much

[@bannedbookclub]

y'all come back now!

[@bannedbookclub]

bro we can't even read

[@elenamontenegro5767]

I mean the guy just said it at the start, they won't talk about anything of importance, no prose no cultural impact, so no surprise how shallow the whole thing Is

[@bannedbookclub]

@@elenamontenegro5767 about as shallow as leaving a review like this without watching the whole thing 🐌 21:58---31:55 - prose/writing style 1:01:02----1:06:49 - cultural impact (in final analysis)

[@shashatarot9084]

Those HJ seens are disturbing af

[@ja615]

Lolita Butterfly is going to be my new stage name.

[@fernandopavon888]

If you think about all the authors writing about murder, vampires, sadism and all kinds of gross subjects yet no one criticises or accuses the author of being weird or creepy or demand that the book be banned. Nabokov seems to have hit a nerve that unsettles society more than blood, murder or any other horror.

[@toriscott1881]

Because this horrific, insideous treatment of children is traumatic like nothing else.

[@Fawn-hv7mx]

People should try the Divine Marqis--de Sade.

[@holden190]

@@toriscott1881Yeah, right genius…..

[@rooruffneck]

He's a pedophile, yes. But, more importantly, he's a vehicle. That's why Humbert Humbert exists. Hopefully this review will stop worrying about Nabokov and get to what he accomplished. For those who need to know, Lolita paints the pedophile as an absolute monster. Nabokov gives us dozens of specific moments to show the child's pain and the horror of the abuse.

[@salbaby123]

need videos to be in colour plz :-0

[@stevenleejobe]

You folks should do your homework before you start making a podcast. Nabokov identified several new species of butterfly but it was his ideas about how butterflies should be classified that inspired other lepidopterists, inspired by Nabokov‘s research, to name butterflies after characters in Nabokov’s novels. That’s just one example. I would recommend that you read other books by him, books about him, perhaps his biography. Then you’ll have perspective on what he was trying to accomplish in the novel at hand. In other words, please get a clue. Otherwise, you make fools of yourselves.

[@bannedbookclub]

Thank you for the feedback. We’ll work in more of Nabokov’s biography for our coming review of Pale Fire.

[@TokyoFae]

I would heart this comment if I could.

[@williammartin2593]

To read VN properly a reader must understand and admit that VN is much smarter than you. Fact. And as in a sonnet only 2 people completely understand. VN and VN.

[@jaekn]

Too sleepy... you are. Next.

[@havefunbesafe]

Lolita is a great book. Nabokov was a gifted author. Nabokov was not weird, he was not a pedophile. You guys are acting a tad sanctimonious in handling a banned book.

[@smoothcritical1]

We don't have to be sanctimonious to acknowledge his obvious paedophilia.

[@morezombies9685]

For not being a pedophile he sure did love writing abouy kids in sexual situations.

[@holden190]

So if an author writes about a murder, does that make him a murderer? You make no sense.

[@havefunbesafe]

@@holden190if an author writes about a murder he is not a murderer. If Nabokov writes about a paedophiliac he is not one. It’s called fiction. The book is brilliant. The movie is incredible.

[@Tupac25Shakur]

We call this literature but then criticize rap and say how is hip hop music !

[@holden190]

Right, rap is equal t the novel.

[@Tupac25Shakur]

@@holden190 nope not even close this is worse. I've never heard a rap song talking about pedophilia

[@holden190]

The book borders on parody:. “HUMBERT HUMBERT” for example.

[@Tolstoy111]

It’s a comic novel.

[@purplepillemergencychannel]

This is a pretty good video but there needs to be some clarification with certain things. When he describes her as a nymphet I noticed that you guys didn't get that definition correct. When you look it up on Google it clearly says that that particular young girl has a certain sexual quality about herself. Very much similar to the young girl that he was in love with at 14. A Nymphet is basically a child siren. The whole foundation of the book and movie Lolita is trying to impress upon the reader/viewer that there are some young girls that are born with a certain beauty and seductress essence. Give us some adult women who just exude sexuality and seduction without even trying or wanting to. The narrator is trying to convey that those types of women probably had that same ability all their life or daddy turned on at a very young age for whatever reason. It's pretty difficult to have these conversations because anything that tries to explain, rationalize or view anything about this story or topic from a scientific perspective, ( unless it's attacking pedophilia) is automatically seen as pro pedophilia. I think that not only does this crippled societies advancement in certain areas, but definitely downplays the ability for us to appreciate certain literature at its height. If my best friend meets someone and they're really amazing inside and out, and has a outlandishly seductive essence to her. I might be smitten with her or even fall in love; and it could even be aimed at me ... but it's not for me to act on it. It's okay for me to acknowledge the effect she has on me, but it's up to me to have the self-discipline to control it. The pedophile must control themselves, however I do believe that Lolita was a conscious seductress.