|
Vladimir Nabokov, Lolita. 1953.
Reviewed by John Bedell
I just finished listening to Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita,
read by Jeremy Irons (who does a great job). I never read this before
because the subject matter holds no interest for me. But I needed
something to listen to and there this was on the library shelf, taunting
me with my ignorance of so many famous classics, and I thought, why
not?
Eeeeuuwwww.
Actually only a few parts of the book are
really icky, in that they force you to imagine things better not
imagined. (Like, the scene early on where the pedophile comes in his
pants from the 12-year-old Lolita's squirming on his lap as they
wrestle.) Lolita is mostly a
construction of words, a castle in the air of lovely phrases, sentences,
and paragraphs, full of allusions to older masterpieces of European
literature and invocations of the ancient past. Much of it is beautiful.
Why, one has to wonder, did Nabokov shower this beauty onto the stony
soil of a pedophile's memoir of his sins? Did he bet a friend that he
could write a great novel about any subject, to which the friend
replied, "All right, child abuse"? Did he want to explore the sort of
evil that is everywhere around us, in the safest suburbs? Was he looking
for shock value and the attention that we shower on artists who offend
us in intriguing ways?
I suppose most of you know the plot. The
narrator, who calls himself Humbert Humbert -- the conceit is that this
is a memoir written in prison, and that all the names have been changed
to protect the innocent -- marries a woman who revolts him in order to
get closer to her lovely "nymphet" of a daughter. The mother then dies,
leaving Humbert and Lolita alone together. He takes advantage. They go
on a year-long car trip across America, staying in every sort of hotel
and motel and cabin, visiting tourist sites; then they settle for a year
in a college town; then they start another road trip. Eventually she
flees from him and he misses her.
What comes to my mind now as I
remember the book is what it says about love. Humbert insists throughout
that he loves Lolita. He expounds his passion in the highest sort of
literary language, full of classical allusions and perfectly balanced
sentences. In a sense, he does. Lolita is the most precious thing in the
world to him, and he would give up everything else to keep her. Yet he
realizes, toward the end, that he has been cruel to her and deprived her
of her childhood. He does not actually regret what he did, but he has
some insight into how their years together looked to her -- as
imprisonment, as a terrible price paid for small rewards, as something
to be escaped from and, as much as possible, forgotten. His love for her
led him to make her his prisoner, and it made him jealous to the point
of murder of anything that threatened to take her away from him.
What
are we to make of such a love? Is the measure of love the passion it
inspires in the breast? Is it the amount we are willing to give to
possess the object of our desires, to make it our own? Or does real love
require that we value our beloved as a person and care about his or her
own happiness?
Humbert would have laughed at notions of love as
respect for the freedom of our equals, all that "let the bird fly away
and see if it comes back" sort of stuff. For him, sane, respectful,
gentle love is a pathetic thing compared to the passion he feels for
Lolita. His love is a madness that takes over him completely and renders
him oblivious to every sort of convention, law, and psychological
insight. Rather than envying others their normal desires, he pities us
for not having passions as mad and as deep as his own.
The
well-educated Humbert also reminds us that our notion of love is hardly
the only one to have been celebrated in civilized places. In the ancient
Mediterranean it was normal for mature men to bed 12-year-old girls,
even to marry them. For some, at least, of the Greeks, the most normal
sort of love was that between an older, more experienced man and a young
boy or girl. Is our revulsion at such love, or at least at such sex, a
sign of increasing humanity like our abandonment of slavery, or is it a
fad like psychoanalysis?
One of Nietzsche's most widely quoted aphorisms is, "All that is done from love lies beyond good and evil." One can consider Lolita
as a meditation on this sentence, and indeed on the whole notion of
rendering human values into simple declarations. What Humbert Humbert
does from love is terrible despite being mixed up with all sorts of
tender feelings and noble sentiments. Lolita
is sometimes read as an allegory of tyranny, with Humbert's imprisoning
love for Lolita representing the patriotic dictator's love for the
country he oppresses. I doubt Nabokov had any such neat parallelism in
mind. I read it as a meditation on emotion, sanity, and perhaps
especially narcissism. Humbert's greatest flaw is his self-involvement,
which leads him to be completely incurious about others. He is
interested in Lolita only insofar as she represents something he
desires. He loves what he sees of Lolita, but he does not see very far
into her soul, and he does not care to. This lack of caring, surely, is a
big part of his evil. How much, though, do we have to know about others
before we can truly love them? Can we ever know enough to justify a
great passion, especially the kind that takes over us in the early
stages of love, sometimes before we know much of each other at all? If
Humbert Humbert were "inhuman," there would not be much point to Lolita.
But he is an entirely human sort of monster, and we all have his faults
to one degree or another. "Human" is sometimes used as a compliment, or
to mean what is best in life -- "humanism," "human rights," and so on.
Nabokov reminds us that it is a neutral word, describing a species in
which good and bad are thoroughly mingled, and the dominance of good is
always in question.
June 3, 2011
|
|
From the
Commonplace Book
Existence is a series of footnotes to a vast, obscure, unfinished masterpiece.
--Vladimir Nabokov
Departments
Home Thoughts
Ideas
Observations
Politics
Arts
History
Commonplace Book
Florilegium
On the Dead
Links
About us
Index
Anathem A
Dance with Dragons Lolita Writing about Magic Children
of Húrin
On the
Road
The Magic
Endures
Antioch at the BMA
Harry Potter on Film
In a Dark Wood
The Invention of Love
Shrek
A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius
The MOMA
The Greenlanders
Modern Art and America
Pritzker Prize
Time to Abolish Art?
|