"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…
When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
61–70 of 71 posts
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#62Earlier 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…
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…
That makes me wonder. What if the girl was adult but power imbalance was the same. How many people would then notice it's not a romance but something horrible?
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#63"Karaka explained that the book glorified a sexual relationship..." This is the issue. And a misunderstanding. That's not at all how I took the book when I read it. It does not glorify anything - it is quite the opposite. What made the book an interesting read (although I have no interest in revisiting it) was the contrast between the tragedy of the story, and the playful language. The unreliable first person narrato…
> The unreliable first person narrator is trying to make himself look sympathetic to the reader, all the while confessing to all his despicable endeavors. Do you know any other books like that? About some different topic?
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#64I’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…
It is easy for me to understand just about any criticism of Lolita, but “turgid“ prose? In my mind it is one of the most beautifully written books in the history of modern English. That makes the book profoundly troubling for me, although of course I feel that no books should be banned for any reason.
It is interesting how truly by-lingual Nabokov was. He wrote Lolita in English and then translated it himself into Russian. The original and the translation show profound mastery in both languages.
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#65I’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…
I'm not sure we've read the same book if someone considers Lolita 'depressingly boring' in tone. The book is full of sly and dark humor and at times satirical, Nabokov has a lot of fun with language (in particular ambiguous puns), addresses the reader directly, and so on. One of the central points of the book is that art and fiction deals with the imagination and the aesthetic (mirrored in the fantasy or fairy tale l…
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#66This 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…
Condescension was also a specialty of Nehru given his upbringing and that might have played a role. Nehru condescended to those he did not considered polished enough - be they Indian or Chinese. In Gentlemen Spymaster, RN Kao's quotes an interesting incident which lends credence to this:
"‘This was my first presence at an international meet and I was impressed with the solemnity of the occasion and the gravity which seemed to hang in the air. At that time, China had not widely been accepted as a respectable member of the international comity of nations, and as we (India) were one of the few countries that had established diplomatic relations with China, Prime Minister Nehru had taken upon himself the responsibility of introducing Zhou Enlai on the world scene. Or, at least, so he thought. In later years, I learned that Zhou Enlai had mentioned to some reporter that he had not met anyone as arrogant as Jawaharlal Nehru and in support of his statement, he had said that it was incredibly presumptuous on the part of the Prime Minister of India to have introduced the Prime Minister of China on the world scene. Well, whatever Zhou’s ego might have been, the fact of the matter is Nehru did help China to gain recognition in the international field. In fact, in that process, we (India) earned a lot of odium,’ Kao observed."
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#67Earlier 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…
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…
"a system of monetary bribes"
"hours of blandishments, threats and promises"
"how sweet it was to bring that coffee to her, and then deny it until she had done her morning duty"
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#68"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…
Sorry could you be more explicit for thick people like me? What's the game, and what's the author trying to trick the reader into believing?
Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#69Re: When Jawaharlal Nehru Read ‘Lolita’
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
India hasn't seen his equal since then.
Lol.. it most certainly has, just that others were relegated to mere footnotes in history