How the Publishing Industry Failed "Lolita" (as told by terrible book covers)

“I want pure colors, melting clouds, accurately drawn details, a sunburst above a receding road with the light reflected in furrows and ruts, after rain. And no girls.”
-Vladimir Nabokov's instructions for the cover design of 'Lolita'
The difficulty of publishing a book like Lolita, not to mention the difficulty of how to market and sell the novel, has been consistent since its first publishing in 1955. In this video, I discuss the history of Lolita's book cover design and explore why such a novel is consistently misunderstood in pop culture.
Works Cited:
1. John Bertram -- www.newyorker.com/books/page-...
2. Dieter E. Zimmer --www.dezimmer.net/Covering%20Lo...
3. Peter Mendelsund in "Lolita: The Story of a Cover Girl" edited by John Bertram and Yuri Leving
Music:
Lobo Loco -- Salvation
Dee Yan-Key -- Rainy Holiday
Ketsa -- Unsilenced
Artwork from:
"Lolita: The Story of a Cover Girl" edited by John Bertram and Yuri Leving
and
Dieter E. Zimmer --www.dezimmer.net/Covering%20Lo...

[@phemyda94]

The Humbert cover isn't just creepy, it's probably the only one that captures the reality that Lolita is NOT a portrait of a girl, whether seductive or victimized, it's a portrait of a gross, lying, disturbed man.

[@augustusfreeman4032]

The Humbert cover is fanmade by the way.

[@FGWProductions]

@@augustusfreeman4032 Figures. What they should really do is put a mirror on one of the covers

[@jht3fougifh393]

​@@FGWProductions Hahah, truth.

[@tecnapurin]

@@FGWProductions This reminds me of Bojack, but in a much darker way.

[@blitzn00dle50]

@@FGWProductions that's brilliant

[@hafluq2979]

So you're telling me that Lolita was not only abused within the pages of the book but at the cover of it as well?

[@Natalie-wr3iz]

One could argue the public further extends the abuse of the character by referring to her only as 'Lolita'. Her name is Dolores and only Humbert ever calls her Lolita, as a sick pet name for her.

[@bellamckinnon8655]

@@Natalie-wr3iz I never thought of that but this is just even more harrowing. Jesus Christ. That’s a really good point, but ugh. Shivers down my spine.

[@mikaroni_and_cheez]

@@Natalie-wr3iz and considering Dolores as a name means 'suffering'...

[@Dervitox]

@@mikaroni_and_cheez suffering would be Sufrimiento which dosent exist

[@greatestgianni]

@@Dervitox well actually ‘dolor’ in Spanish means pain in English. So, dolor-es would mean pain and suffering as well.

[@squigg7107]

My favorite cover of this book I’ve seen was an image of a butterfly pinned to a board. Something that has been killed out of one’s possessive infatuation with its beauty.

[@thekitkatlizard8661]

I also like the one in this video where a premature, plucked and wilting rosebud is laying in someone's rough male-looking hands for similar reasons, except the addition of youth now never being able to fully grow due to someone's selfish action 3:07

[@chanapatata4925]

I browse the web and found another one similar. It’s a picture of a butterfly with another picture laid on top. The picture is a terrifying looking man holding a butterfly net. I think it’s very suitable.

[@chillfactory9000]

I liked the one with the doll. It shows the fact that Humbert does not view Dolores as a real little girl, but a doll. A toy that he can do whatever he wants to because its just a doll- thats how he views her.

[@mrpseudonym893]

I like that one as well, because it also works on a meta level. Nabokov himself was both a lepidopterist and sexually abused as a child by his uncle. This type of author parallel is (I think) a worthy comparison to his own metafictional ideas in Pale Fire.

[@isaacgray2909]

It's also fitting as butterfly is a common motif in Nabokov's overall books

[@TheMovieSequelDude49]

Honestly, I gotta respect Nabokov for being specific of what he wanted with his cover, especially the "No girls" part which definitely stands out. It showed he understand the ways this story could be misinterpreted and wanted to prevent the risk of the image of Lolita being sexualized or represented in a physical way. Nabokov knew what kind of story he was writing: an ugly, disturbing story meant to serious discussions of difficult subject matter. It's not a romance or an erotic thriller or anything close to the sort. Just a shame publishers didn't give a crap. It really is messed up seeing all these covers trying to make Lolita "sexy" despite being _explicitly_ a minor.

[@oro7114]

@Indigo Rodent not sure what to make of that

[@davidwuhrer6704]

Sex sells.

[@fredhasopinions]

Yeah, and as a result he’s been screwed over, with everyone thinking his book is a romanticisation of some disgusting fantasy of his, rather than a study of the psychological downfall of a liar.

[@unofficialmajima617]

@@fredhasopinions or, think about maybe, maybe it IS actually a romanticization and the dude is a weirdo much like the other people in his time

[@ylias8993]

@@unofficialmajima617 discussing difficult topics doesn't make you a weirdo. If that was our attitude we'd never have important conversations. People act like calling writers from the past weirdos and creeps is some hot and revolutionary take justifying their not wanting to read important books. Lolita is a litmus test for people, in my opinion. If you see it as romanticization, that says more about you than about the author.

[@effeffiagonalick5078]

Nabokov: This book is about a man sexually abusing a minor. Cover designers: It’s a book about a minor seducing a man, got it. Nabokov: Did I stutter what is wrong with you!?

[@CordeliaAurora]

I don't think he was very surprised given how it's acceptable for adults to treat minors and given his insights on the matter.. Like child marriage still being legal and so many men spewing the bs that kids are at the best age for r*pe or other disgusting bs they say. Or "teen" being one of if not the most popular category of p*rn. Or so many old famous people dating 18 year olds and thinking it's normal just because it's legal.. Attitudes haven't changed much and what seems to us "socially unacceptable" seems perfectly fine to some horny people.

[@user-xh7sd1sw9f]

@@CordeliaAurora the youngest mother in history was five year old. Certain conservatives believe that if God would let her get pregnant, she can get married, and of course its not her decision she can't legally sign a contract! Its not a big deal if this little girl (from one woman's story) is screaming at the officiator in the marriage office not to marry her, parents know best. before nixon legalized divorce (his one good thing I know of), it was illegal without reason. with statuatory rape exemptions for married children, and with legal marital rape, this meant the government would physically enforce a child being raped and put them back to their husband. It could even be CPS doing this, bringing them to their legal guardian. And it still does. "But oh, I know PLENTY of 12 year olds who were married and are now so happy!" Fucking rape brainwash.

[@abdulmulkiaulde3014]

its either the cover designer read only the first half. (the part before they go on some "rOad TrIP") or the cover designer read the entire book. but smokin some shit and get high so they just thinkin. "hmmmm. so how but.... yeah uwooooh SEGS"

[@JustAPrayer]

What’s sad is Nabokov had some creepy relatives in his life that he based some of the scenes in the book on. He really would not be happy about his book has been depicted on film

[@Sootielove]

It's a fascinating reflection of how media views the "deadly sin" of lust. When you picture gluttony or sloth, we're always shown men indulging in these sins, but when it comes to lust, it's instead the object of lust: a sexualised woman. Using the image of Humbert, a sick man who abuses a young girl instead of Lolita as the object of his lust is an incredibly compelling change. It's almost frightening how easily media fell into his point of view

[@cheese584]

Yes, I always thought the representation of this "biblical sins" in media was ilogical and inconsistent.

[@ViktoriaMagrey]

It's bonechilling. Our "modern culture", so to speak, is extremely hypersexualized and lustful; therefore it cannot see lust for what it is any more than you can meet yourself in person. You cannot accurately portray a distortion when your view is already distorted.

[@strawberrymilk607]

That’s an interesting observation. I notice that the symbol of lust being a sexualized woman connects with the culture of blaming women for sexual harassment, assaults and rape. The idea that it is the woman’s fault for dressing a certain way, and men are just lustful creatures with no self control, that’s all too prevalent in the church (and even outside of it).

[@Envy_May]

THANK YOU this definitely bothers me. even good media falls into doing this, like fullmetal alchemist

[@prettypenguin1944]

There’s a relatively obscure but extremely underrated series of middle school grade novels centered around embodiments of the seven deadly sins that had a really unique portrayal of the sin of lust while still keeping it appropriate for kids: in addition to being a boy rather than a girl as typically expected (though to be fair, all the other sins were boys as well), he was actually quite cheerful, friendly, well-mannered, and seemingly the nicest one of the group; but at the same time, he was extremely clingy, had no sense of personal space, and had very obsessive and possessive tendencies to the point of coming off as rather unnerving. Granted, he was nowhere NEAR as sick and twisted as Humbert is, given how it was a book series intended for younger audiences, the sin of lust technically being a kid himself, and the series’ core themes centering around how the seven deadly sins are normal human behaviors everyone partakes in at some point or another and can actually be beneficial in certain cases as long as you strike a balance and don’t take them too far (i.e. it’s okay to feel envy towards other people but you should use it to motivate you to bring yourself up rather than have it motivate you to bring others down, it’s important to take pride in yourself but it’s also important to care for others and help them be the best they can be, etc.), but it’s both fascinating and sad that a book series for children has a better understanding of the seven deadly sins than most media intended for adult audiences, and by extension, a better understanding of the core themes of Lolita than most multi-million dollar publishing companies.

[@internetgirl2001]

as an early teen sexual abuse victim, the cover with the dead tiny rose in the man's palm really speaks to me. this guy ruined my life. it's been so hard to de-hypersexualise myself and see myself as an important person aside from my ability to meet a grown man's sexual expectations, after being treated as this free-willed sex symbol for my abuser, when in retrospective i was obviously being groomed.

[@nunyabiznes33]

The pain will probably never go away but I hope you are doing better now and have learned to trust again.

[@michelletabares5336]

This is a deeply insightful take. I’m so sorry that happened to you.

[@b.994]

I hope you’re doing well

[@guodaripinskaite6314]

I’m sorry about what you went through. I wish you strength and persistence in finding your real worth and rejecting the ugly scenario you were stuffed into. I too was sexually abused, but in my early childhood, but in such a strange subtle way that that to this day I can’t clearly remember what could have possibly happened. I have all the symptoms but all the possible memories are blocked and locked, probably because I didn’t even know how to process or understand what was going on. I lost my personality - I never got to develop one, fear of any kind of intimacy + sexualisation (from age three) + running away from reality to fantasy world, lying unnecessarily, hiding by dissociation, anxiety and a myriad of other problems I’m almost 24 now and finally (slowly) cracking into my early childhood reality and real identity

[@guodaripinskaite6314]

It’s a tough fight

[@bobdolesrevenge]

I've seen so many people call Nabokov a pedophile, which is probably the best example of judging a book by its cover I've ever seen.

[@thetruth830]

especially since he was sexually abused himself as a child

[@robertdullnig3625]

I got kicked out of a book club essentially for saying Gabriel Garcia Marquez was not a pedophile. The person who kicked me out is a huge Nabokov fan.

[@raradinevali]

how is he not a pedo tf

[@yasmineguerin2852]

@@robertdullnig3625 who

[@ameliavelasco8602]

Have you not seen his other works?

[@vurrunna]

This is exactly why book covers matter. The cover of the book sets the initial impression on the reader. It creates a mental image of what this book is about, an image that stays with them the entire way through. It's literally a night and day difference here, between covers that sexualize a child, to a cover that condemns a predator. "Don't judge a book by its cover." Great advice for general life, terrible advice for actual books.

[@cameronschyuder9034]

I think it’s still a good advice for books in the sense that people *shouldn’t* judge a book by its cover (shouldn’t base their impressions of what Lolita is with its sexualized covers, for instance), but people do anyway. Not judging something by its cover doesn’t mean the cover doesn’t matter, it just means needing to look past the cover if you’re unable to change it yourself

[@jankoodziej877]

I don't think this is universally true. I've read plenty of good fantasy books with the utterly terrible covers (it's the genre standard) that went out of my mind the minute I opened the book.

[@SplendidCoffee0]

@@jankoodziej877 the OG Wheel of Time covers were so damn beautiful.

[@vurrunna]

@@cameronschyuder9034 Oh you're totally right about "Don't judge a book by it's cover" still being decent advice (especially here, since, y'know, _the covers are wrong)._ I was mostly just trying to make a pithy quip to wrap up my thought. A more accurate way to put it would maybe be: "Great advice for life, terrible advice for book cover designers." I dunno, it also just might not work the way I want it to in my head. The wonders of language.

[@jazzpear8877]

Yeah I also think "don't judge a book by its cover" seems to absolve book cover designers of their responsibility to design well.

[@Ruminations09]

Jesus, that Humbert cover is horrifying... Whoever designed that cover is an absolute genius, I never would have guessed such a simple book cover could make me so profoundly uncomfortable.

[@spaceface320]

The perspective change is interesting. In previous covers, we were looking at Lolita or aspects of her. The audience was Humbert, looking through his eyes. Then the last cover, Humbert is the subject-sweaty, almost leering, lost in his delusion. It’s gross. The audience is now Lolita, looking at the person who is imposing their desire and illness onto them. And I think it’s so effective at redirecting the previous uncomfortable sexualization around a child, to whom is at fault for this framing, the adult main character. The power imbalance shifts, from the viewer being Humbert to being Lolita

[@Wintermute01001]

That cover really is genius. The man isn't even all that ugly or unusual-looking but still manages to be terrifying.

[@chukyuniqul]

I thought it was a good cover for the book, but strangely that was my only reaction. Ok nvm the implications are settling in. I get why it makes you uncomfortable.

[@AnEmu404]

@@spaceface320 You know it’s funny, I’ve never read the book but if I remember right, her name is actually Dolores. I think it goes to show how the sexualisation/misinterpretation has warped the discussion of the book so much, that people still refer to the character by nickname that the predator gives her, since that’s what people remember her name as. It’s an interesting observation, and I think your comment is well written and articulates the feeling of that cover perfectly.

[@spaceface320]

@@AnEmu404 Coming from Mexico, those who are named Dolores are also commonly called Lola or Lolita as nicknames. I agree that the fact that she gets referred to as her nickname by the main character, , the audience frequently knows her through that name, and that’s the title of the book, really cements the projected perspective of her. In looking at the language of the book, words that have the suffix -ita and -ito in Spanish specifically denote a minuscule version of the noun. It has an endearing quality to it. Cucharita = little spoon; Casita = little house; Lolita = little Lola.” In a way, it perfectly captures that Dolores is just a child. But in the context of the novel and how the main character uses it to refer to her, it’s more sinister and predatory. It totally changes the tone of the suffix from its original intention

[@no_i_in_kersten]

When you showed that cover with the man my body literally seized up that image made me so uncomfortable, which is exactly how I felt the entire time I was reading Lolita. So yeah, I agree, that's the most striking and accurate cover for a book like that.

[@heartache5742]

that was a satisfying moment wow

[@abathtub1411]

same. I also feel like humbert being on the cover couldve really helped reduce public misreading.

[@sarads7877]

3:21 That cover also had that effect on me, i think it really conveys how disturbing these events are

[@matttzzz2]

Imagine the book cover featuring the founder of Islam and his child bride Aisha

[@heartache5742]

@@matttzzz2 edgy

[@jinxtheunluckypony]

I think the cover with the shattered lollipop is my favorite. The imagery of something innocent being damaged feels appropriate for this kind of story.

[@jazzy4830]

While fitting it is also painfully on the nose.

[@InfernalPasquale]

@@jazzy4830 Agreed, I particularly enjoy the blurred one

[@ollytherevenant1653]

@@jazzy4830 I don’t see anything wrong with it really. It articulates the themes clearly, I don’t mind it being obvious.

[@jazzy4830]

​@@ollytherevenant1653 I'm not saying it's necessarily bad but it's the equivalent of using a licensed song in a movie whose lyrics correspond exactly to what's occurring in the scene.

[@ollytherevenant1653]

@@jazzy4830 …. I don’t mind that too much either lmfao

[@breadcrumbhoarder]

The cover of the man is definitely the most affronting and disturbing, but I also like the one of shoe stepping in gum. It represents Humberts abusive power dynamic, it’s gross, and it’s almost gory with the way the gum is stretched, it reminds me of muscles. If you’re going for something symbolic I like that one a lot

[@thetruth830]

I agree, I also felt this way with the lollipop one.

[@pricklypear7516]

The symbolism is, perhaps, not quite as esoteric as the shoe/gum cover, but I liked the tiny, blighted rosebud in the palm of the man's hand. Certainly gets the point across.

[@breadcrumbhoarder]

@@pricklypear7516 idk I think it has a lot of symbolism, unable to bloom because it was plucked too early

[@MattMcIrvin]

The shoe cover also alludes to another theme of the book, which is that Humbert sees himself as this European sophisticate floating far above the world of tacky roadside Americana that he's being forced to endure (entirely due to his own actions).

[@BBWahoo]

"Stretched" 🤢

[@jennahills9825]

The cover with the 2 beds pushed together is so interesting to me because it clearly depicts the story and the relationships it contains without having to present either character. The implication of someone with power and strength having forced together 2 things clearly made to be separate is a perfect metaphor for what the story is about, and the objects being 2 single beds is even more illuminating. It could be viewed as romantic or creative by some, but for those that have read the book or know the content, it is a truly chilling image.

[@brigit9692]

Well said. I thought the same thing -- as someone who has read Lolita before, that cover image evoked the same feeling of unease that I got while reading the novel and strongly reminded me of it.

[@aitanacruz9882]

I didn't think about that at first, but it still seemed eerie to me. It made me think of those pictures you see of crime scenes.

[@laurencleveley]

It also relates to in the novel when Dolores and Humbert stay in twin rooms, posing as father and daughter as they travel though motels. The purchasing of the double hotel room to ease the public, then to shatter that illusion behind closed doors and force them together unnaturally.

[@yyg4632]

@@aitanacruz9882 youre right. i think part of it is the lighting and clinical photo angle.

[@yyg4632]

that one struck me as well. Its a sad hotel room setup done in a rush. Glomy lighting and a crime scene looking photo angle. It implies sex, but not love.

[@one_smol_duck]

The cover with Humbert Humbert on it isn't just unproblematic. It's also just _good._ Most people know enough about Lolita to get instant chills seeing his face on that cover. Those chills are a much stronger reaction, make the book much more intriguing, than a girl with a goddamn lollipop. Anyone who is actually interested in reading Lolita will be instantly drawn in by the cover. Anyone who is instantly drawn in by the covers sexualizing a child.... The best I can hope is that they're thoroughly ashamed of themselves by the time they finish the book.

[@fritz6600]

I never read the book but I sure does heard it from time and time again, the biggest reason why I never picked up that book was because I feared that it might be a sadistic pedophilia fantasy of sorts. From the first cover with a belly and a rose (yuck) to the heart-shaped glasses, I just misinterpreted the book completely. The cover of the antagonist is nevertheless intriguing!

[@jankoodziej877]

@@fritz6600 to be clear, the book is written from the standpoint of the paedophile in a way that makes the reader sympathize with him. It's definitely written to intelligent reader who will realize what's happening.

[@fritz6600]

@@jankoodziej877 Interesting!

[@akaashikeijiluvr]

so true omg when the video showed that cover i immediately wanted to look away. it made me very uncomfortable.

[@asdfghjjkl12345zxcvb]

I legit got chills when I saw it

[@brutusthebear9050]

I'm surprised no one is using butterfly imagery. Nabokov was an entomologist as a hobby, and used the imagery of a butterfly in the novel to describe Lolita herself. If I were to make a cover, I'd have it be a chrysalis, cut open haphazardly.

[@fairycat23]

A chrysalis cut open haphazardly is an excellent cover image for Lolita.

[@gurlwurld]

saw another comment of someone saying theyve seen one with a butterfly pinned to a board

[@ceren7618]

if it would make you happier, in turkey, the cover has nabokov hunting butterflies on it

[@andresiglesias6952]

Wow that image make me feel sick, completly apropiate for Lolita.

[@brutusthebear9050]

@@gurlwurld See, I thought of this at first, but that would imply a fully formed butterfly. In the book, it's very deliberately done that Lolita (spoilers by the way) dies before she is able to turn 18. Specifically of complications with giving birth, iirc. So she was never able to become a butterfly.

[@thereadingwriter4197]

When you said “no girls” I out loud said “thank god”

[@alexanderk.6869]

And that's the word of Vlad himself

[@averyspecificdragon8780]

The Humbert cover legit caught me off guard and I don't know why. Maybe it's because I expected this man, this "great academic", this fucking monster to look-- different. I refused to really picture him when I tried to read it, but-- he just looks so normal. So happy to see this girl as he destroys her life. And I guess that's why it disturbed me so.

[@jellyfish0311]

Isn't that what happens to many groomers? They look pretty much normal or weak/small in some ways, and no one would suspect them of their monstrous activities

[@shoelessbandit1581]

@@jellyfish0311 depends where you are tbh, in America that's true but in Europe... There's some obvious telltale signs

[@McDonaldsCalifornia]

@@shoelessbandit1581 most abuse happens in families no matter the ethnicity or race. Get out of here with your implied xenophobia

[@wilgefortisohlin568]

It makes sense, after all he got access to Lolita after marrying her mother. It is how groomers can get access to kids.

[@mynamejeff3545]

@@shoelessbandit1581 What are you talking about? These monsters look like normal people here too. Unless you're referring to the fact many of them wear a priests' clothes, but that's no different than in America

[@samtrott776]

This video blew me away. I have a serious issue with the way Lolita as a story is portrayed in our culture. It isn't a love story, it doesn't make you feel good, it is a story that messes with your mind. Read most reviews on good reads, Humbert is manipulating you and taking you along with his screwed up reality. I love the Humbert cover because if you know anything about the story, that cover scares you and gets you invested. I thought this was a disturbingly excellent point to bring up. Really well done and well-made, well edited and captivating commentary.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thank you! I appreciate the comment, and that cover of Humbert was what motivated me to make this video. truly disturbing

[@aff77141]

Seriously, there's people that genuinely refuse to read the book because they think the pop culture view of it is true, and that's not only sad but sick that we know our society could easily do that. Some of the covers though I gope would make it much more blatant. It just feels like he's thinking about her with the hint of a smile, and the way he's slightly sweaty--it's all so real and so horrific at the same time

[@yasmineguerin2852]

@@aff77141 bc it's also uncomfortable duh

[@piffba]

It’s kind of like Romeo and Juliet, in a way. Both are tragedies misconstrued into love stories. Romeo and Juliet isn’t a love story; it’s a tragedy depicting two teenagers falling in love and subsequently dying. Lolita isn’t a love story; it’s a girl getting groomed and abused by a much older man who sees her as a sex object. But since the book and the play have something to think about, an extra layer, and most who read/watch the works don’t want or don’t see that extra layer (#weliveinasociety😔) they got misconstrued into love stories. The skin-deep analysis of them.

[@alidabaxter5849]

I have an early copy with an absolutely plain cover - nothing alluring in any way. Interestingly I read the book when I was 18 and could remember what pretty girls I'd been at school with were like and how they behaved and (amazing to recall) I pitied Humber. Years later I read the book again and was appalled - what a monster - and I think this shows the genius of Nabokov. That he shows how this twisted monster lies to himself and we are party to his lying. I've read so many Nabokov novels but this one was and is extraordinary.

[@AtlanticGiantPumpkin]

One of my favorite covers features Dolores’s feet inside of high heel shoes far too big for her. They slide to the front like a child playing dress up. To me it represents not just Humbert aging her up in his mind, expecting this child to have the maturity of a grown woman, and also society’s maturation of her character, turning her into a grown sex symbol.

[@Someone-wr4ms]

I always thought that the book covers were trying to show the sick delusions of the main character by portraying Lolita as a sexual, almost ad-like way. In reality, they weren't, the just wanted people to buy the book that has the pretty girl on the cover, which taking into context the content of the book.... Yeah it's pretty disgusting...

[@katzea.a7880]

That would have been wayyy too intelectual, can't have that on marketing

[@maryfreebed9886]

The cover with Lolita herself or her things should have been saved for an entirely different sweet coming-of-age novel concerning the blossoming love/friendship between two kids, not this.

[@overgrownkudzu]

yeah especially since the character of Lolita is specifically described as objectively not very beautiful or charming etc. The whole point was that this sexual object was just something Humbert made her to be in his mind, while she was just an average kid. They made the cover of the book the literal fantasies of the pedophile sexual abuser character with no self awareness. great. love that.

[@chocomelo454]

honestly the ones depicting Dolores in a school uniform (mostly just her shoes) are way smarter bc it emphasizes that she's a *child.* but considering modern era it's just as bad. I'd probably say that if you had to depict Dolores on the cover, having a shattered looking shadow of her would be smart. it'd both obscure her identity (because Humbert doesn't see Dolores, only Lolita,) and show that something hurt her / broke her. Having the cover be a man's hands tearing apart a doll or teddy bear would probably be cooler though. especially the doll one.

[@MinisDunyasi5]

Lolita isn’t Dolores’ story. We don’t get her perspective throughout the story. It’s Lolita’s story. And Lolita isn’t Dolores. Lolita is Humbert’s delusion of Dolores. Humbert buys Dolores new clothes and accessories to make his delusion of Lolita come to life. When he explains the “love” (which in reality is pe@dophili@ and lust), he feels for her; it’s not towards Dolores; it’s towards Lolita. Dolores isn’t Lolita; she doesn’t become Lolita either. She’s still Dolores, but Humbert’s delusional and lustful mind believes she’s Lolita. Nabakov was also very clever with the naming of Dolores and the book. Dolores’ name is sad and poetic. It’s Spanish and means sorrows, sorrowful and pain. Lolita is a word/name Humbert fabricated; it wasn’t used before the book was published. Humbert made up Lolita. By calling her Lolita, he erases her personhood and her pain in their interactions. He's hiding her pain within his sick fantasy. Dolores never calls herself “Lolita”. The name "Lolita" is used only by Humbert. Other characters refer to her as "Lo", "Lola", or "Dolly". Humbert calling her Lolita denies her subjectivity. Humbert also says, "Lo-lee-ta" Humbert tears Dolores' whole essence to shreds. He rips her apart and dehumanises her. In real life, it's part of how abusers can attack the victim; by renaming them, they're erasing their prior identity and exerting control over them. This is why I find the Humbert cover so clever. The Humbert cover shows Humbert’s mind, the real Lolita, which doesn’t exist and was only a part of Humbert’s delusion.

[@casperbinnett8265]

So ironic that the way these book covers portray Lolita forces the public to engage in the very sexualization of a child that the novel itself condemns Edit: it's a flame war in those comments Bois- be careful

[@m136dalie]

Nabokov doesn't condemn or approve of sexualising children in Lolita, it serves a vehicle of storytelling.

[@casperbinnett8265]

@@m136dalie how is an entire story revolving around feeling both deceived and disgusted by a child predator, who the book lets rot in jail and die in guilt for his crimes and applauds that turn of events, NOT condemn it?

[@m136dalie]

@@casperbinnett8265 How is the ending applauded? It's in 1st person right up to the very ending and the overall tone is sad or neutral. As for how it's not being condemned, simply the fact that nowhere does the book make an effort to condemn Humbert. In fact the worst thing that happens to him in the whole book is the fact that Dolores left him (ultimately leading to his death). Humbert being a paedophile serves multiple purposes. It serves to subverse the typical romance narrative, to make the reader not sympathise heavily with the main character, as well as to attract readers thanks to a shocking premise. But NOWHERE in the book does Nabokov feel the need to criticise paedophilia. It's assumed that the reader already feels very strongly on this (as you would expect almost anyone to) so there's no reason to dedicate any portion of the book to criticising this. You don't need to tell the reader "wanting to have sex with children is wrong". Which is why he doesn't.

[@casperbinnett8265]

@@m136dalie the literal foreword of the book, written by Mr. Ray, tells you that Humbert died in jail and that is a GOOD THING. That he was a Monster?? I understand there's a huge push nowadays to have all morals fed to people with no need for extrapolation but Lolita isn't even one of those cases???? And even if it was, the amount of ways Humbert is portrayed to have negative, controlling qualities VERY MUCH CONDEMNS IT??? Did you read the book??

[@casperbinnett8265]

@@m136dalie I'm sorry. I just. Lolita does NOT paint pedophilia out to be a good thing or even a neutral thing. And just because characters arnt running around saying "pedophilia is bad" explicitly it does not mean the book isn't condemning it. The book not condemning it would be the book treats it as fine. As you notes the entire book is gross and kind of sad in tone. That would be acknowledging the reality, even if separated. It's not OVERT to the point of being BORING? But that does NOT mean it isn't condemning it. You are told to NOT agree with Humbert in the foreword. You spend the whole book feeling the pull of his disgusting actions against his charisma. The fact that his actions ARE DISGUSTING and there is no justification for it, and the book is built for you to be disgusted? And you're told that is the point by the framing device of it being a journal published by a phycologist? Is condemnation.

[@JC-zt8lf]

The way 3:29 genuinely caught me off guard- I don't think I've ever actually seen an ordinary depiction of Humbert before so just seeing him so starkly really made me feel uneasy. like, he's just *there*. not showing any expression. so serene.

[@adam.n-steve]

For me, he's relaxed. He's relaxed because he's having a "good time" with "Lolita". He looks like he's enjoyimg himself while Lo is doing what he forced her to do.

[@tookiwolfpaint5142]

it reminds me of the bit in American psycho, where bateman says that "although you may shake my hand and feel warm flesh i am simply not there".

[@coffelita]

With the music and the way he introduced the cover, it gave me chills and fear.

[@karak962]

I love it too because his eyes are closed. He's LITERALLY seeing his daydreamed version of her.

[@teslashark]

He's saying: Bro?

[@madeleinesvensson5636]

So no one is actually listening to the author, cant say i'm surprised. And that one cover with the sexy legs, like WTF who is ok with that kind of sexulising of a minor? If I had read that version of the book I would have been outraged... or disgusted. Like i'm sorry WHAT!

[@ManCarryingThing]

Trust me...there were some WAY worse covers I couldn't show. It's honestly horrible how normalized it is. I feel like I need to go wash my brain. And still, it's hard to find a new edition of the book that doesn't have any depiction of the character on the cover.

[@madeleinesvensson5636]

@@ManCarryingThing Yeah the problem lies with the publishers i guess, just so unfortunate to see so many covers like that. I have actually never seen the one with the eerie looking man before easily one of my new favorites for this story. It even meets some of Nabokov's wishes with the melting, rain/wet look, colors and details.

[@jimsbooksreadingandstuff]

@@althechicken9597 The idea of Hermione being black seems an afterthought to JK Rowling after the books were written. In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince in Chapter 5, Hermione has a bruise. When Mrs. Weasley is trying to heal it while trying to lessen her resemblance to half a panda. It is very unlikely a bruise would make a dark-skinned person resemble a panda.

[@bruisedviolets]

@@jimsbooksreadingandstuff dont forget the description of hermione “white face”

[@alexf225]

@@jimsbooksreadingandstuff I honestly don't mind those headcanons about Hermione and Harry being non-white, even if some lines in the book contradicts those possibilities. Still, it is pretty clear that Rowling made her black to please fans. In the original she made the golden trio white. If it makes someone feel better, especially since poc characters are very rare in the franchise and are all very minor, then I don't see a problem if someone likes to imagine black Hermione/non-white Harry.

[@isaa1782]

When I read Lolita I realized how few people have an idea what it is about. They think it to be some kind of erotic romance book. Not because they read it and think child abuse is good, but cause they didn't. Everything they probably saw and knew was the way it gets advertised. The cover is just one - important but not the only - part of how it was constantly marketed as something totally different. It's shocking honestly...

[@justjack1352]

It reminds me a lot of how people *think* they know what Fifty Shades of Grey is about through cultural osmosis alone, and believe it to be this super sexy and provocative story and not a textbook depiction of actual abuse and the author's misunderstanding of what BDSM is. Except for Lolita it's arguably a lot worse.

[@juliall255]

@@justjack1352 Difference is that Lolita is MEANT to be disturbing. It takes the portrayal of an unreliable narrator and really goes to town with it in the most horrific way and its execution is truly beautiful in spite of the disgusting subject matter. Genius writing. Fifty shades of grey is pure stupidity and terrible writing.

[@lada8744]

@@justjack1352 Fifty Shades purpose is tilation and porn. It started as a Twilight fan fiction. It’s exactly what it appears to be. Lolita is the opposite. Lolita dives into the mind of a truly broken man.

[@cordasolis]

I haven’t read it myself, but for me personally, I found a copy of it (I saw the cover on the left at 2:29) at an antique store and when I read the reviews on the back, they were all praising the “hilarious comedy and witty writing” it just grossed me out because all I’d previously heard of the book was about the sexual nature, and the reviews just made it worse.

[@lada8744]

@@cordasolis To be fair, the book is hilarious. It’s definitely a black comedy.

[@daisieswitch24]

have to say the way lolita is always on the cover bothered me so much, its like the publishers don't understand what's the book about. the cover with 2 beds smooshed together and one depicting humbert gave me chills, they are so haunting when you know what is the content of the book

[@thekitkatlizard8661]

I do like the one at 3:07, since Humbert's hand (which also looks kinda grimy?) takes up more cover space than the tiny little wilting premature rosebud that's supposed to be Lolita

[@malu26]

I also find these sexualized covers problematic, because they imply that it's actually the little girls fault because she seems to be behaving suggestively to seduce this older man, who couldn't resist obvious advances...I haven't read the book yet, but I belive that is definitely not the way Nabokov intended this story to be interpreted... Humbert is not the victim. (Update: I read the book and stand by my point)

[@janerecluse4344]

Lolita wants nothing to do with him. When she is his goddamn captive, taken from state to state and raped in every hotel, she's resentful and sullen and extorts him for anything she wants, struggling for some kind of control. It's a tragedy.

[@0011peace]

The American Movie had a lot to do with that and to make it paletable they raised her age to 16.WOuldn't matter if 12 yo as slutty people would castrate a man having sex r even fantasizing about 12 yo. But increase the age to 16 now she is legal so it becomes comming of age film.

[@balthus9105]

I've always interpreted it as Lolita seducing Humbert, it's been a long time since I've red it but Lolita is definitely not a victim either they're as bad as each other.

[@0011peace]

@@balthus9105 you are saying a 12 yo is as bad as 50+ year old man. Even if 12 yo is permiscous a 50+ yo man should know not to take her up on such an offer. Plus the book is written from his point of veiw so he will show her as being more into than she may have been

[@Rachel-fi4sc]

@Balthus You have swallowed the lies of the unreliable narrator hook, line, and sinker. Dolores Haze is a child. She is not gonna realize that a touch meant innocently is gonna be misunderstood as sexual by a sick man.

[@mafaldaviana9060]

Ok, but has anyone actually design the "pure colors, melting clouds, accurately drawn details, a sunburst above a receding road with the light reflected in furrows and ruts, after rain" cover? Because I really want to see it.

[@estebson]

It seems that, despite everything, not a single person actually just followed the simplest of directions.

[@mookiess]

Honestly, weird how the author specifically said what to put on the cover and as far as I know not one person (maybe fanmade it’s possible) actually listened. It’s strange most opted for just sexualizing a child instead which in the context of this is just equally as disturbing as the nature of the novel. At some point you have to wonder that the marketing and sales ain’t worth the image you’re portraying.

[@noon4593]

Poor sweet Dolores. I watched the movie as a teen and felt so disturbed, and you just want her to be SAFE finally. It's so scary that the narrative by Humbert can make people demonize a developing child, Dolores....even today? I don't feel that we've come far since the authors time, sometimes. Sometimes it feels like predators have become more elusive and manipulative in their language/perspectives.

[@nitebreak]

she’s forever victimized, even when people read it

[@sweetcheeks5775]

Well now they’re getting fake tits and going into women’s spaces.

[@emilybarclay8831]

@@sweetcheeks5775 your obsession with trans people is a bit worrying. Given that the vast vast vast majority of sexual predators are heterosexual men

[@arro2546]

dolores also means pain

[@thesoffgengar]

there's a lolita book cover that has been burned onto my mind. i don't know if it's official or if it was someone's concept art, but it was an illustrated cover. on dark grey sheets, a pale foot being gripped by a man's hand, while his other painting one of her nails. it still haunts me to think about it but in that intriguing way where i know if i keep thinking about it i won't be able to resist going back to look at it even if it terrifies me

[@plutolunaplays]

I’m trying to find it but it’s not any use. Let me know if there are any more details you remember, if that’s not a problem.

[@shinybearevidra]

I remember that one, I saw it on a shelf in my local library some years ago

[@Lenlon703]

@@havinyldrm3041 both of them are great and by that I mean horrifying thank you

[@giulyblaziken268]

I remember that one too, it gave me chills

[@raccoonchild]

That's brilliant on so many levels at once.

[@annabv55]

People who think Lolita is about a sexually mature young girl or even just about a man’s relationship to a young girl have missed the mark completely. It’s a study of a very mentally sick man, and the child that happens to be the victim of his sick nature. The way the name Lolita have become a synonym for a young woman or girl who acts sexually challenging and mature for her age just shows how extremely misunderstood the whole story is.

[@sheila70]

The night after her mother dies, H takes her and later hears D crying..."I wasn't worried, she had nowhere to go" Most horrifying line

[@007mooo6]

Idek how ppl think it's a romance😞 I felt like I read a narcissistic psychopath trying to explain why it's okay for him to want a young girl. Literally this man kinda scaring me

[@ivy-gp5to]

​@@007mooo6Yupe my thoughts

[@sophiatalksmusic3588]

Great analysis! My take on the cover would be a piece of paper with the name “Dolores” written on it in crayon, but overtop it is a stamp that reads “Lolita” in red ink.

[@qwlol]

In the spirit of increasing the sample size of feedback, I think this idea is a bit too on the nose to my liking

[@greatestgianni]

I actually really like this

[@xXAcidBathXx]

I think it works! Might be a bit on the nose, but it’s certainly better then what most covers are.

[@hayleynew3605]

That’s actually a pretty good idea for a book cover the crayon is meant to represent Dolores‘s childish innocence while the red ink is meant to represent her pedo step dad‘s fantasy of Lolita

[@acksawblack]

😂😂😂😂 the subtlety

[@soph0861]

"How did they ever make a movie of Lolita? Well, they didn't" Jamie Loftus said the exact same thing in her podcast episode about Lolita about two years ago.

[@indubio1]

Podcast *series*. ‘Lolita podcast’ is fantastic. This video does a lot in 4 minutes, but Jamie Loftus really uses her multiple episodes to delve deep. Strong recommend.

[@madelinevlogs5898]

I just finished Lolita Podcast and it was amazing

[@imveryangryitsnotbutter]

A film adaptation of Lolita could be done. Just have it shot entirely in first-person from Lolita's perspective, so that the audience is forced to experience first-hand the horror of being at the mercy of a disgusting pedophile. The only question is, would audiences be brave enough to stomach such an ordeal for a feature-length film?

[@klara9698]

where can i find this podcast?

[@jjba3571]

And i hope they never will, at least they use a 18 year old that happen to look very very young cuz no girls should have to act this role..... is way to traumatic for their poor brains

[@EvelynMaya1]

The cover with the two beds one perfectly made and the other a mess is the one that disturbed me the most.

[@thekitkatlizard8661]

Yeah, it kind of gives me liminal space vibes but in a far worse way, something even more uncanny and dreadful

[@teethcoat4274]

Ahhhh holy shit I didn’t realise only one was messy that’s so fucking creepy in what it implies

[@goldcherries]

@@teethcoat4274 Interesting. I didn’t think of it in that way. It made me think one was for an adult and the other for a child. But honestly it was more disturbing see the two beds pushed together because that implied to me the nature of the relationship.

[@Manticorn]

Yeah, glad to see I'm not the only one who probably is so disturbed by a cover that good that I don't think I could deign to have it in my house and have to look at it.

[@esverker7018]

I've always thought of Lolita as a litmus test for finding who is easily led by the nose. I've known many people that just CANNOT stop giving Humbert lenience because since they read it through his eyes they cannot truly see him as irredeemable. They just can't let go of Humbert's perspective to read between the lines.

[@the_demon_cat337]

Im curious about that now it’s something I’ve noticed (specifically for books) and am making a effort to fight against. I’m curious how prevalent/extreme it is. I stood out to me in Sandman specifically actually.

[@books2438]

@@the_demon_cat337Do you mean the comics? And about what specifically?

[@the_demon_cat337]

@@books2438 oh sorry that wasn’t clear but basically I ment I tend get stuck in characters heads the first time reading through I was more favorable to Dream however on rereads with the ending in mind I could see the flaws way more clearly.

[@EeveeFlipnoteStudios]

I really like the Humbert cover. "Lolita" is just his nickname for her, a false image he imposes onto her, as is everything else detailed in the books. Her real name is Dolores Haze, and we don't know anything about what she really thinks and feels. All we have is Humbert's word-- and his nickname for her. She is never referred by her real name in the story. Juxtaposing Humbert as the subject of the cover to a book titled "Lolita"-- the nickname, the fantasy, the projection-- is brilliant because it also flips the contents of the story: pretty words and romanticised scenes experienced all through the eyes of Humbert - an image of Humbert as seen by an outsider, for what he really is. It grabs that subjective lens in the story and points it outwards, directing attention away from "Lolita" and instead focuses on the man who is responsible for creating "Lolita."

[@MinisDunyasi5]

I agree with you! The Humbert cover is so clever. Because Lolita isn’t Dolores’ story. We don’t get her perspective throughout the story. It’s Lolita’s story. And Lolita isn’t Dolores. Lolita is Humbert’s delusion of Dolores. Humbert buys Dolores new clothes and accessories to make his delusion of Lolita come to life. When he explains the “love” (which in reality is p3@d0phili@ and lust), he feels for her; it’s not towards Dolores; it’s towards Lolita. Dolores isn’t Lolita; she doesn’t become Lolita either. She’s still Dolores, but Humbert’s delusional and lustful mind believes she’s Lolita. The Humbert cover shows Humbert’s mind, the real Lolita, which doesn’t exist and was only a part of Humbert’s delusion. Nabakov was also very clever with the naming of Dolores and the book. Dolores’ name is sad and poetic. It’s Spanish and means sorrows, sorrowful and pain. Lolita is a word/name Humbert fabricated; it wasn’t used before the book was published. Humbert made up Lolita. By calling her Lolita, he erases her personhood and her pain in their interactions. He's hiding her pain within his sick fantasy. Dolores never calls herself “Lolita”. The name "Lolita" is used only by Humbert. Other characters refer to her as "Lo", "Lola", or "Dolly". Humbert calling her Lolita denies her subjectivity. Humbert also says, "Lo-lee-ta" Humbert tears Dolores' whole essence to shreds. He rips her apart and dehumanises her. In real life, it's part of how abusers can attack the victim; by renaming them, they're erasing their prior identity and exerting control over them.

[@whatalsaid]

That last book cover was unnervingly creepy. I think looking at THAT is how anyone should feel about reading Lolita, instead of Lipstick or Heart-shaped sunglasses.

[@jacobb5484]

How about heart shaped sunglasses shattered after being crushed by a boot?

[@nitebreak]

@@jacobb5484 i think that works a bit better

[@omp199]

_Any_ cover that tells the reader in advance how they are supposed to feel is artless and crass. Allow the author to tell their story as they want to tell it, and allow the reader's feelings to develop naturally as the story progresses.

[@W-I463]

​@@omp199all covers do that? Intentionally or not when you pick up a book the cover sets the mood

[@omp199]

@@W-I463 I'm not saying it shouldn't set the mood. Just that it shouldn't undermine the art of the storyteller. I mean, you wouldn't want the cover of a murder mystery to depict the murderer standing over the body of their victim with a knife in their hand, would you? It would destroy the mystery.

[@fridahan588]

something I found weird is that we the audience sexualize Dolores just like Humbert did, these book covers prove that and the fact that no one knows her or calls her by her name but by the sick pet name given to her

[@janerecluse4344]

Yeah, Lolita is her slave name. Her friends call her Dolly.

[@MinisDunyasi5]

I agree. That’s why I find the Humbert cover so clever. Because Lolita isn’t Dolores’ story. We don’t get her perspective throughout the story. It’s Lolita’s story. And Lolita isn’t Dolores. Lolita is Humbert’s delusion of Dolores. Humbert buys Dolores new clothes and accessories to make his delusion of Lolita come to life. When he explains the “love” (which in reality is p3@d0phili@ and lust), he feels for her; it’s not towards Dolores; it’s towards Lolita. Dolores isn’t Lolita; she doesn’t become Lolita either. She’s still Dolores, but Humbert’s delusional and lustful mind believes she’s Lolita. The Humbert cover shows Humbert’s mind, the real Lolita, which doesn’t exist and was only a part of Humbert’s delusion. Nabakov was also very clever with the naming of Dolores and the book. Dolores’ name is sad and poetic. It’s Spanish and means sorrows, sorrowful and pain. Lolita is a word/name Humbert fabricated; it wasn’t used before the book was published. Humbert made up Lolita. By calling her Lolita, he erases her personhood and her pain in their interactions. He's hiding her pain within his sick fantasy. Dolores never calls herself “Lolita”. The name "Lolita" is used only by Humbert. Other characters refer to her as "Lo", "Lola", or "Dolly". Humbert calling her Lolita denies her subjectivity. Humbert also says, "Lo-lee-ta" Humbert tears Dolores' whole essence to shreds. He rips her apart and dehumanises her. In real life, it's part of how abusers can attack the victim; by renaming them, they're erasing their prior identity and exerting control over them.

[@shibumi-tanuki]

A thing that I noticed in the sexualized covers is that, in a way, it victim-blames Lolita for her abuse

[@MinisDunyasi5]

Similar to how people say, “She was asking for it”, “She shouldn’t have worn that”, “She shouldn’t have acted that way”, “She was giving mixed signs” to so many SA victims.

[@maggiefelisberto5281]

I work at a library and our copy of Lolita was returned to us today (penguin classics, with lips). I thought about how Nabokov never wanted that kind of image on the cover of the book, and KZbin seems to have read my mind and sent me here. Loved this mini essay

[@Coffy-chan]

Nabokov: Hey I wrote this book about how terrible this is. Publishers: How about for the cover we romanticize it?

[@greatestgianni]

And then attract the wrong type of crowd to your book….and then have them romanticize that

[@wondergirl1586]

I feel bad that he's getting hate for this

[@Coffy-chan]

@@wondergirl1586 Sadly the current social climate seems to be a general blind hatred for all figures and cultures of the past. Education, and the notion of context, is lost lol.

[@wondergirl1586]

@@Coffy-chan in know so best to educate yourself as much as you can

[@Coffy-chan]

@@wondergirl1586 We've got more access to information than we've ever had in human history. It is a good time if you want to inform yourself.

[@kitaylor4135]

The phonetic spelling of ‘lo lee ta’ on that book cover hit me the HARDEST. The visual representation of youth, and how young ‘lolita’ is just makes me feel sick, while still showing how despite the obvious recognition of her age in Humberts eyes, he finds it somewhat attractive, similar to when he analyses her name within the book and the sounds it makes. Genius.

[@sophiatalksmusic3588]

I found it somewhat disturbing too, but couldn’t put my finger on why.

[@teethcoat4274]

I believe it’s also a quote from a passage in the book, though I’m not absolutely certain as I’ve only read that one passage and not the whole novel

[@buttercup3248]

@@teethcoat4274 it is !

[@MariaJArce-bl3jm]

I know it is utterly disturbing, what does it even mean? It should say /ləʊˈliːtə/

[@keshi5541]

lo lee ta (lolita), The reason it might be disturbing is because when new words appear before a child they usually try to pheonetically sound it out to themselves in a innocent fashion to understand how to say it properly since they are inexperienced still trying to know more about the world. At a young age they learn many words throughout the beginning of their life so this makes sense. I myself interpret imagine the girl saying it slowly, ignorant to its definition. It give you an eerie feeling combined by the tainting meaning behind the word (meaning: seductive young girl) to which she is unknowingly saying out loud. It kind of conveys manipulation as If a young girl is taught to say a word she doesn't need to know herself and is inappropiate to even say considering what I mentioned earlier. I haven't read the book but that is what I got from it.

[@adeleaslan8182]

I think a good improvement for Lolita would be the iconic heart glasses on the cover broken, shattering the romantic ideas you might have of the book

[@raumarsene9910]

One similar one I've seen is a cover with a shattered lollypop

[@Bonebrothsoup]

That cover with Humbert on it was absolutely horrifying, which is exactly the kind of emotion "Lolita" should cause. I'm surprised it's not more commonly used. The symbolism of it and effect are just perfect

[@omp199]

A book whose cover browbeats you with a message of, "This is how you must feel about this book!" undermines the art of writing. If you have already been told how to feel in advance, why even bother to read the book?

[@greyboi9550]

The Humbert cover legit almost made me cry, it's so disturbing, so vile, so sicking, and so true to what the book is actually about

[@DanielGreeneReviews]

This is your best video yet. My lord that was well done.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thanks man, that's so encouraging to hear

[@Funilesh]

Your move o Goblin Host!

[@jamesmurray3021]

I agree disheveled goblin. I’ve seen that picture with the sunglasses so many times and never knew what it was from. I never knew there’d be such an intriguing story behind it.

[@yyg4632]

3:42 Youre right, thats the perfect cover. The story, we view through the rose tinted glasses of Humbert. But the cover, we view through the eyes of Lolita. The reality. An old imposing person who's just in his own little perverse fantasy world. Its a good metaphor for the male gaze as well. The book is the POV of the viewer, the cover is the POV of the victim. A completely different feeling. I would love to know the artist because its amazing. The microexpressions and details just come together to make us feel just like a victim of this very specific type of discomfort, a sexual kind.

[@plixplop]

This misinterpretation of "Lolita" is deeply ingrained in our pop culture, remember the "Long Island Lolita" scandal in the 90s? A man had an affair with a teenage minor girl, and they attempted to kill his wife. The media scandalously portrayed the girl as a "temptress"

[@potatortheomnipotentspud]

Well the media moguls have always been groomers so that's no surprise

[@xXAcidBathXx]

Wtf! I feel so sorry for the girl, having her mind warped to by someone older then her into trying to commit a heinous act.

[@nitebreak]

i hope everyone who said that is ashamed

[@Taskicore]

Yeah she's a victim but she went along with the murder plot. Like man if you're 12 you know not to murder someone. It's much different than sexual maturity. There's obviously something up with her.

[@michipeachy69]

@@Taskicore Nah, he's an older guy, and she's a kid, kids get abused all the time by making them believe they'll get in trouble for telling, all it takes is a "I think my wife knows, and if she tells anyone we'll be in trouble, we gotta kill her" she'll be scared, but he's a grownup telling her she'll be in trouble if she doesn't go along, so she'll do it reluctantly

[@rinzzzzie718]

It's quite sad that not every writer gets their requests or wishes granted on they want their books to be. Also, the book cover with only Humbert's face on it is honestly the perfect cover.

[@omp199]

Your two sentences contradict each other. The perfect cover is the one that the author requested. A cover that effectively browbeats you with a message of, "This man is disgusting! You must find him disgusting! BE DISGUSTED!" undermines the work of the author. The point of a story is to take the reader on a journey, revealing what needs to be revealed as the story progresses, and allowing the reader's emotions to react accordingly. A cover that tells you how to feel in advance makes a mockery of the art of literature.

[@dedstar2132]

@@omp199oh god shut uppp you’re everywhere commenting like there’s nothing wrong with covers that sexualize a minor when the book is about condemning pedophilia

[@omp199]

@@dedstar2132 I haven't defended the covers featuring girls. In another thread I was defending the author's choice of cover. As for what the book is about, I think the problem is that people make up their minds in advance what the book is about before they have even read it. What I am saying is that people should go into the book without such preconceptions.

[@Allenluvable]

I have a lot of respect for the author. He knew exactly what people might try to make of this story, and tried to counteract it. It didn't work, but I still greatly appreciate that he cared enough to try.

[@ethanyoder9953]

The Humbert cover is incredible. A book cover has never made my stomach drop before.

[@KelseyHontz]

This reminds me of how modern covers of Flowers in the Attic mimic the Twilight cover and showcase blurbs like "a forbidden romance..." Like, no. Who the hell approved that???

[@annenonimus6709]

I got an old edition of that book. It has a hand ripping off the cover, as if was a sheet. What the hand, having ripping of it, reveals, is the screaming, tormented face of a girl suffering. I wish the covers stayed like that.

[@ninjabluefyre3815]

So, I just looked up the plot of Flowers in the Attic. What the actual hell, marketing divison?!

[@meppep6733]

I can't perfectly describe in words how I physically felt when you showed the cover at 3:35 ! It's such a great but sickening cover, seeing the depraved face of Humbert uncensored. The shock from it felt like a bunch of needles sticking into me all a once. The music also added. I'm so glad more and more people are getting the proper understanding of this novel. Great little video on this topic!

[@oakleywyatt1717]

I always get cynical when people like Lana del Rey say that they loved the book or even found it 'inspiring', I can't help but wonder whether any of these people have actually read the book. Because they seem to romanticise more of this old hollywood, playful, romantic vibe, which seems more similar to the misinterpretation in pop culture, rather than the actual story.

[@raccoonchild]

'Inspiring' lmao 😭 if only *the* Nabokov had 'inspired' her to actually write good lyrics. I don't believe anyone can read that man's work and not come out writing at least a little better.

[@hoesmad8207]

@@raccoonchild if we talking about Lana, she came a long way especially in her new album which she explores those kind of theme much better, like in "a&w" and "candy necklace"

[@AYVYN]

Millions of girls love this book and Clockwork Orange for all the wrong reasons. Perhaps a demon stole their free-will. Regardless, I find it funny and intriguing.

[@VerityBooks]

This was an amazing video! The marketing and perception of Lolita has bothered me for ages, and I'm sad to say that my copy of the book also isn't great (although not the worst either). It's so aggravating to see people romanticizing something that is so obviously supposed to disgust you

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thank you! Seeing the alternate book covers motivated me to make this video, especially since it is so hard to find a decent cover of this book

[@zhisu2665]

I really dislike the overly childish covers because they're portraying the novel as something wholesome and friendly.

[@MapleMilk]

As serious as the idea of a book's identity being inexorably tied to its cover, I find it also kinda darkly funny that the publishers went "she's 12 zamn" When printing the covers

[@tylerlynch2849]

Cant believe I just watched a short, no fluff, well-edited video on a compelling topic. Well done!

[@Jurgan6]

Kind of reminds me of Kafka’s Metamorphosis. He told the publisher not to put a cockroach on the cover, but I have seen roach covers for sale. It’s a metaphor, you’re not supposed to be thinking about a literal roach.

[@notsosadbart6343]

The cover with the two beds pressed together at 3:20 hit me the hardest. It foreshadows when Humbert brings his victim to a hotel while running from the law. The low lighting and emptiness of the room conveys a dark, eerie feeling. Also, the beds look like they were deliberately pushed together, which looks strange and unusual since the beds are so large, it immediately makes the viewer raise an eyebrow. One of the beds has also had its blankets and pillows disturbed while the other remains pristine. It's an interesting symbol for the two characters, and their forced "relationship" and knowing what the book is about makes the hotel bed imagery that much more disturbing. I could be reading too deep into it but either way hats off to the creator of that cover.

[@marikkelaszlo3355]

It's the creepiest for me because it looks like a liminal space image mixed with a crime scene photo (which it literally is with the context of the story) Also the grainy, colored filter it has makes it feel old which actually makes it feel like you're looking at a story set in the 40s/50s.

[@DellaStreet123]

In the book, they often get two adjacent rooms with a common door between them, both of them fitted with double beds. Humbert muses what kind of orgy those accomodations were meant for. I wouldn't have been surprised if Humbert, after using only one of the double beds that night, messed up the other one as well because he is growing increasingly paranoid. When they are in Beardsley, he starts stripping his bed himself in the morning even though they have a housekeeper, because he suspects that the housekeeper is inspecting the sheets for wet spots.

[@jztouch]

Lolita is incredibly well-written and is probably un-filmable. Kubrick is obviously a fantastic director but even he wasn’t able to do the book justice. Nabakov’s command of the English language is masterful and a movie can never put that across. I’d never seen 99% of those book covers and certainly the last one is, like you say, the most accurate. Chilling.

[@alicethemad1613]

I honestly think a simple image of an old fashioned hotel key, a highway map, a painting of an American landscape, or just the view out of the windshield of an old car would work really well as covers too.

[@gharqad]

I couldn't agree more. And that seems to be the direction VN's own description of his preferred cover points to. I think that captures a lot, and tells us how much of this novel is about America.

[@abbylucas8855]

The Humbert Humbert cover struck me in a way a wasn’t expecting. It was startling. That’s exactly the reaction we should have to the book.

[@mehlover]

Whoa the Humbert Humbert cover scared me, plus the transition with the scary unsettling music helped. Dang, I never knew the history of this book. Great job on this video

[@gaj30]

i actually couldn't finish reading lolita. it made me feel very sick (possibly because im a victim of this myself) and it makes me feel even sicker seeing how lolita is portrayed sometimes

[@naolucillerandom5280]

I was considering trying to read it, but I probably won't be able to handle it.

[@Wawagirl17]

After hearing Jamie Loftus (of "Lolita Podcast") summarize the novel in detail, I shouted "Oh god, NO!" out loud far too many times to believe I could ever stomach a full read-through.

[@CamWolfeAuthor]

3:33 yeeeeah that's about how I would have expected Humbert to look, greasy skin and all 😬 great vid!

[@leonmayne797]

Ooh, that design makes me shiver. Which is what you want from a cover of Lolita. The audience knows what they're getting - a disturbing book.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thanks! And definitely...that cover will haunt me

[@althechicken9597]

Yeah thats definitely the cover that gets the vibes of that guy being a narcissistic monster, the other covers of sexy, definitely not 12 year Olds are creepy and seem like they are brushing things aside. Why couldn't they just "not put a girl on it" as I said in another comment, listen to authors on things that matter, not on Hermione secretly being black all these years.

[@thekitkatlizard8661]

His hand at 3:07 is grimy too

[@yasmineguerin2852]

@@althechicken9597 huh?

[@lizzie5734]

Didn’t know much about Lolita before watching this video but that cover of that man immediately sent chills down my spine, especially in contrast to all the other covers and talk about placing a girl on the cover. It’s in such juxtaposition with the other covers and yet it fits so well. I immediately wanted to go and buy the book and read it as soon as I saw that spine chilling cover. Even the way the title is placed is perfect

[@jerrywhoomst1116]

This is a really good vid, your channel is disgustingly underrated and deserves far more views.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thank you :)

[@fena_reti]

This was so dark. It’s so disappointing to see how easily people bend their morals for profit.

[@UncannyValleyVideos]

The book's legacy really didn't stand a chance with this awful marketing. I remember seeing one tagline that read "The greatest love story of the 20th century". Are you fucking kidding me? No wonder so many people misinterpret the book.

[@Galloway278]

I am halfway though it now and my husband said last night, “isn’t that about a little girl who is a prostitute?” Ummmm… NO. So this video popping up was timely.

[@ninjabluefyre3815]

That's Angel!

[@tomperry5947]

So many KZbinrs would have dragged this out into an hour an a half video essay starting with the birth of the author . Respect for the brevity when you so could of easily made an enjoyable , if long winded video essay

[@mercedeswalt6621]

Wow, this makes a point I didn’t really realize. It’s the “before Cuties” attitude of making children as sexually aware as adults which they are not. MUST…REREAD…BOOK…

[@overgrownkudzu]

it's also interesting how universally dragged Cuties was for doing basically nothing that hadn't been done before except being self aware and critical about it. (Before anyone gets mad, yes there are some things in that movie that are debatable but people were mad at it not for nuanced reasons but because "sexualising kids bad" which is true but also exactly the point that went over their heads)

[@raccoonchild]

@@overgrownkudzu I'm tired of this braindead logic. Does it matter if the text is 'critical' if the work itself is still serving perverts what they want on a silver platter? At that point it just comes across as convenient, calculated self-justification.

[@silvergust]

​​@@overgrownkudzuthere's a line between making a critical piece and then subjecting real children to s3xualization on screen. also, more specifically, context matters, and the woman who made it didn't do very good of a job with defining the critical aspect or intentions w/ the movie. objectifying little girls while telling ppl to stop objectifying little girls... and it's not even from the unreliable narrator pov like the book (and even the 1997 adaptation, which has it's flaws, but still actively hints at humbert being a manipulator and shows dolores in distress when alone and from her pov)

[@meoueo]

using a pretty girl on the cover might be seen as a way to portray Lo through the eyes of Humbert but by doing so we're only falling for his manipulation

[@charissadubin9355]

“Lolita isn’t a perverse young girl. She’s a poor child who has been debauched and whose senses never stir under the caresses of the foul Humbert Humbert, whom she asks once, ‘how long did [he] think we were going to live in stuffy cabins, doing filthy things together…?’ But to reply to your question: no, its success doesn’t annoy me, I am not like Conan Doyle, who out of snobbery or simple stupidity preferred to be known as the author of “The Great Boer War,” which he thought superior to his Sherlock Holmes. It is equally interesting to dwell, as journalists say, on the problem of the inept degradation that the character of the nymphet Lolita, whom I invented in 1955, has undergone in the mind of the broad public. Not only has the perversity of this poor child been grotesquely exaggerated, but her physical appearance, her age, everything has been transformed by the illustrations in foreign publications. Girls of eighteen or more, sidewalk kittens, cheap models, or simple long-legged criminals, are baptized “nymphets” or “Lolitas” in news stories in magazines in Italy, France, Germany, etc; and the covers of translations, Turkish or Arab, reach the height of ineptitude when they feature a young woman with opulent contours and a blonde mane imagined by boobies who have never read my book. In reality Lolita is a little girl of twelve, whereas Humbert Humbert is a mature man, and it’s the abyss between his age and that of the little girl that produces the vacuum, the vertigo, the seduction of mortal danger. Secondly, it’s the imagination of the sad satyr that makes a magic creature of this little American schoolgirl, as banal and normal in her way as the poet manqué Humbert is in his. Outside the maniacal gaze of Humbert there is no nymphet. Lolita the nymphet exists only through the obsession that destroys Humbert. Herein an essential aspect of a unique book that has been betrayed by a factitious popularity.” - Vladimir Nabokov (tr. Brian Boyd), Apostrophes (1975)

[@yeethittter1285]

3:08 I really like the cover with the wilted rose bud in a hand. It's a really great metaphor for Dolores, the power imbalance between her and Humbert, and the fact that she was damaged while still being only a 'bud'

[@raccoonchild]

It's the best one both in concept and execution since it just looks so nice and fits the book so well. But I do like the one with the two beds pushed together as well. My ideal cover would have a chrysalis torn open, as someone else suggested, partly because Nabokov deeply loved butterflies.

[@yeethittter1285]

@@raccoonchild I like the bed one too. It's subtle but does a good job telling you about the main theme. The picture itself has a good atmosphere

[@carlcarlington7317]

Honestly I would’ve given the cover a creepy horror vibe. Maybe a drawing of a doll on top of a night stand in a dark room with the title written in bold text, Stephen king type of stuff comes to mind.

[@valuebrandmelkor5973]

I imagine an old photo of a playground, with Humbert an obscure figure in the background to the left.

[@sophiatalksmusic3588]

Your comment just brought to mind the “Broken Crayons” exhibit, which displayed drawings by children who suffered trauma, with many of the drawings alluding to the specific occurrence. I’d imagine something like that would be fitting for Lolita, too.

[@umetnikmina]

As someone who was taught in high school how to makw book covers (art school - graphic design), this is INFURIATING to hear. Such disrespect....

[@FuckTheYoutubeUsernameChange]

genuinely baffling how people took this book about a sick, delusional man obsessing and lusting over a literal child as an "unconventional, sexy romance"

[@CordeliaAurora]

Same society that has children marriage and "teen" as a popular p*rn category and a bunch of men saying little kids are the most "ripe" 🤮 Really not surprising at all.

[@AuroraExhale]

As far as the illustrated ones go, the image of an adult man’s shoe stepping through bubblegum hits really hard for me

[@bizzychoco855]

Found this channel through your skits and memes but this essay is really informative, concise and thought-provoking. The reveal of the cover with Humbert Humbert was unsettling, just like the Nabokov’s narrative. Well done

[@ankitashandilya1303]

Awesome channel. Came for the memes, stayed for the amazing literary takes.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Lol, thank you!

[@LordVader1094]

2:29 "The only convincing love story of our century" WHAT THE FUCK??

[@phuongthaotrinh6390]

The one we have in Vietnam is a full beige cover with a single blue butterfly in the middle to signyfy Lolita's innocent. It was so simple, beautiful and elegant and through out the read you slowly realize that like the butterfly, she's just as vulnerable and helpless in the hands of her captor and at the end, there's a butterfly in black and white with torned wing. I was 15 when I first borrow it from a nearby public libary. At first i didnt saw it as a bad thing, even secreatly adore Humbert's devotion to Lolita. It's didnt help that I also saw the 1997 movie with Jeremy Irons cast as Humbert. I was quite naive and lack of care at that age so to a young me, that was like a love story. When i was 22 and read it again, yeah it was horrifying to put it lightly.

[@lyadmilo]

The version I was given at college looked like a court case file, which is just neutral enough with a definite take on "This is a crime!". I thought it was fine morally at least if not the most artistically inspired. I really like the blurry text take myself.

[@Hadeshy]

This reminds me of when I thought of buying Lolita. "I've heard so much good thing about it, might be worth a try, it would be hard for me to read but OH MY GOD WHAT IS THIS COVER?! No, no, I do NOT want this in my room. EW!" (For those wondering: I had the choice between the drawing of a girl in a two piece swinsuit laying on the ground. Or a picture of an adult blond woman wearing makeup, with a hand on her shoulder. Considering what Lolita is about, I felt repulsed by those covers)

[@greatestgianni]

This is why I got a pdf….with no cover

[@oofym353]

Shout out to penguin classics, who recently released a hardback cover which Is just yellow with black motel signs. No Sexual imagery, yet the motel signs still make you feel queezy knowing the subject matter.

[@KibblezanBitz]

That cover depicting Humbert is deeply disturbing, but in an understated way. It really is the best cover for a book like this.

[@jacksiegfried5830]

If anyone is interested in hearing more about the ways that pop culture has twisted Lolita, there is a great podcast called “Lolita Podcast” that covers a bunch of the history in great detail

[@madelinevlogs5898]

I recently finished it and it was amazing. I haven’t read Lolita and idk if I will, but it connects to the sexualization of teen girls which I had to deal with

[@potionseller2083]

Do the Metamorphosis next, with Kafkas wish to never depict an insect on the cover.

[@blue---monday]

The cover with the two beds literally looked like a crime scene. So, apart from the Humbert cover you showed, that particulsr cover was also unsettling. The muted hue, the pov, and the style of the room of thosr two beds!! Literally looks like a crime scene!

[@pin-upprint7459]

So glad to see someone address this. The amount of people seduced by Humbert, without realising he is not just a monster, but also an unreliable narrator. Turning her into a sex symbol makes me embarrassed to be human.

[@beeswaxxx]

This video was short and brilliant. For years I've been trying to tell people that the novel denounces Humbert's behaviour, yet everyone still thinks it's about the glorification of his attraction to a child. It's not the only occasion in which Kubrick completely distorted the vital message of a novel, the same can be said for the way he treated the subject matter of A Clockwork Orange.

[@maximegarciadiaz2581]

god i love the cover with the name plate necklace, i wanna own that book. and the cover with the beds makes my skin crawl

[@OneWholeBird]

People really looked at Lolita and thought “We should market this to pedophiles”

[@OneWholeBird]

You know why the movie Leon was so successful.

[@giulyanoviniciussanssilva2947]

The cape of scarlet hands holding the girl's foot applying red nail polish is the best for me, it's the hands of a monster who is in total control of a very sad situation.

[@ghosty8193]

When I was doing English A level, my teacher as an exercise, got us to write an excerpt in the style of Lolita. As in, adult narrator completely focused on a younger character. It was one of the most uncomfortable things I've ever had to do. And when I bought the novel, I went out of my way to get a copy with a blank or more 'artsy' cover. I felt gross owning a copy with sexualised girl on it.

[@weinerherz0g]

as someone who was victim to CSA from 4-15 years old, the original cover nobakov wanted made me cry with fear. i do not have a weak constitution for my triggers but something about his ghost of a smile while lost in his delusion is so incredibly accurate and horrifying to me.

[@dedstar2132]

The cover with the sweaty man’s face is fanmade, not exactly the cover Nabokov specifically gave instructions for

[@larsland]

First, amazing video. So much info in such a short time. Beautifully edited. I’m so glad the algorithm picked it up again. Second, I’ve read the book. It’s a beautiful and haunting depiction of grooming and abuse. The movies I’ve watched hardly resemble it.

[@billyalarie929]

This really hit the spot real good. This explains a lot more about this novel than I could ever get before.

[@ManCarryingThing]

Thanks! I appreciate it

[@goingbonkerswithmyhonkers9374]

In the newest version of the movie from like 20 years ago, they portray the girl as some sort of vixen and the man as the victim. So messed up