Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

scroll.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#41

Post by ericlewis »

mise_en_place wrote: post #18
neild wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many answers to why Lolita was well received by many people. (It's worth noting that it was certainly not universally well received--many, many people share your opinion of it.) One is that many of the people who like it seem not to have read it; or if they have read it, they did not understand it. Many men have described it as "a love story" or otherwise indicated that they feel the book approves of pedoph…

I've only seen the Kubrick adaptation but it was very heavily implied that the narrator is impotent. He's shown to be a character to be laughed at, nervous in his behavior, and quite hapless in romantic overtures. Contrast that with the movie Pretty Baby where the main character becomes obsessed with a 12 year old prostitute and then sleeps with her. I find that movie to be more bordering on the obscene than Lolita .

I’ve not read it either, but perhaps it’s similar to how a horror movie is less horrifying than reading a horror book. Artistic license occurs and you are compressing source materials. Based on other descriptions in the threads here, the character is terrible but trying to make himself sound good. How your brain interprets that can differ. Abject monster seems what everyone else thinks, but movies probably would change that and make him into an awkward idiot.

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#42

Post by xwolfi »

rfrey wrote: post #24
xwolfi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the pedophilia has an interesting twist: the child initiate then dismiss it while the main character, writing from jail, is a victim of it. At least on a first level, but sometimes you can feel it's not exactly how it is for Dolores. It's strange and surprising all along, it's in 3 parts: the rise up to the seduction, the american road trip and then the morale: youth is passing, children play and forget, whatever…

Disgust at the rape of a 12 year old is not prudish.

Inability to see no one has been raped is though. Feeling this disgust while reading the perspective of the pervert is what is interesting. You don't need to be "fascinated", just relax, read the beautiful English, frown at the turpitudes of the monster and stop censuring this thing that at best can serve as a warning tales for young girls ?

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#43

Post by thunkshift1 »

kaesar14 wrote: post #30
muststopmyths wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There weren’t a billion people then. Also, he didn’t have censorship power. Rather if you read the article, he convinced the people who wanted to censor it to not do so. We seem to have forgotten what statesmanship is these days. India was and is a very conservative country. For him to not do the easy thing was indeed a reflection of his character. For all his faults, he was a great leader.

India hasn't seen his equal since then.

Lol.. it most certainly has, just that others were relegated to mere footnotes in history

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#44

Post by neild »

mise_en_place wrote: post #18
neild wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many answers to why Lolita was well received by many people. (It's worth noting that it was certainly not universally well received--many, many people share your opinion of it.) One is that many of the people who like it seem not to have read it; or if they have read it, they did not understand it. Many men have described it as "a love story" or otherwise indicated that they feel the book approves of pedoph…

I've only seen the Kubrick adaptation but it was very heavily implied that the narrator is impotent. He's shown to be a character to be laughed at, nervous in his behavior, and quite hapless in romantic overtures. Contrast that with the movie Pretty Baby where the main character becomes obsessed with a 12 year old prostitute and then sleeps with her. I find that movie to be more bordering on the obscene than Lolita .

Kubrick is one of those men who looked at Lolita and saw a romance, when it is plainly and clearly a story of appalling abuse and rape. Watching a movie adaptation will not tell you anything at all about the book, because the movies are made by men who did not understand the book in any way.

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#45

Post by neild »

xwolfi wrote: post #20
PeterWhittaker wrote: post #4

I’ve tried to read Lolita a few times, and have never made it through. Between the turgid prose, the abominably horrible narrator, and the pedophilia, I simply lack the endurance and interest. My daughter had to finish it for a uni project and she confirmed for me that the depressingly boring tone continued to the morally inadequate end. I’ve read a few of the “greatest” books of the last 200 years and simply cannot…

But the pedophilia has an interesting twist: the child initiate then dismiss it while the main character, writing from jail, is a victim of it. At least on a first level, but sometimes you can feel it's not exactly how it is for Dolores. It's strange and surprising all along, it's in 3 parts: the rise up to the seduction, the american road trip and then the morale: youth is passing, children play and forget, whatever…

Humbert marries Dolores’s mother. After her mother’s death, Humbert travels to Dolores’s summer camp, takes her away, and rapes her in a hotel room. There is no seduction. There is no ambiguity about what happened. She is twelve years old, her mother has just died, and her stepfather has taken her far away from any friends or relatives and had sex with her.

This section of the book then concludes with one of the most chilling passages I have ever read in fiction:

“At the hotel we had separate rooms, but in the middle of the night she came sobbing into mine, and we made it up very gently. You see, she had absolutely nowhere else to go.”

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#47

Post by skybrian »

nineplay wrote: post #36

"her sobs in the night - every night, every night - the moment I feigned sleep" Just a reminder that this is not a book 'glorifying sexual relationships'. This is not a book about a seductress. This is not a book that plays with ideas of consent. Nabakov is playing a game with the reader, trying to trick the reader into believing that there is any truth in Humbert's narrative. I suppose it shouldn't be surprising tha…

It's been a long time since I read it, but my impression at the time was that it spent way too much time dwelling on an unpleasant subject, and that one line showing that the author knows what he's doing doesn't redeem it. I came away rather mystified: what's the point of spending so much time in this character's head?

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#49

Post by newyankee »

haltingproblem wrote: post #34

This is a fluff piece on a man who was a pox on India's political development in its nascent years. Nehru in addition to being a dynast who doled out plum postings to his family and friends, Nehru was illiberal beyond belief [2]. He gave his sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit, the posting as India's Ambassador to the UN, when she had no diplomatic experience or formal education . Wikipedia's list of banned books shows that…

Vijaylaxmi Pandit was the same person who took ahead Nehru's ideas of Hindi - Chini bhai bhai (Indians and Chinese are brothers) when China never reciprocated and instead backstabbed India. Some of Nehru's notable achievements:

1. Not moving fast enough on Kashmir issue after instrument of accession signed by Maharaj Harisingh. If not for Sardar Patel, there would have been multiple festering issues with other areas as well. 2. Creating a political legacy of family and cronies only. 3. Setting up of a license permit raj which held back Indian economic development for decades.

Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’

#50

Post by GeorgeBanica »

PeterWhittaker wrote: post #4

I’ve tried to read Lolita a few times, and have never made it through. Between the turgid prose, the abominably horrible narrator, and the pedophilia, I simply lack the endurance and interest. My daughter had to finish it for a uni project and she confirmed for me that the depressingly boring tone continued to the morally inadequate end. I’ve read a few of the “greatest” books of the last 200 years and simply cannot…

>morally inadequate end

Should books only be morality tales, where Good always vanquishes Evil in the end?

Post reply on HN