Young Writers Society

What I find in Russian author Vladimir Nabokov's 1955 novel Lolita is not, despite what a modern reader might infer, a moral novel. It does not condemn hebephilia nor does it condone the practice. Instead, I see an author utilizing his signature tools to great effect. These include literary trickery, flowery language and the use of suggestion. It is this which sets his writing apart from others in the 20th Century, and it is no surprise that Lolita is his most controversial and well known of his novels. At once, it is a confession and a road trip novel, structured along the lines of a tragedy to mask the events which unfold.

Born in 1899, Vladimir Nabokov was raised in a prosperous family in St. Petersburg, until the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Nabokov was forced into exile on several occasions in his life. In fact, this led to him being labelled as an émigré novelist, often involving characters exiled and trying to habituate to new surroundings. The protagonists of his Russian novels- such as Mary, The Gift, Glory, Despair- are outsiders to their respective societies. Nabokov himself went to Trinity College, England, before moving to Germany where he wrote his Russian novels. Again, he was forced to move in 1938 because of the rising Nazi Party and their anti-Semitic Nuremburg Laws (his wife, Vera, was Jewish). He only stayed in Paris for about two years, until the Nazi occupation of France, in which he moved to America in 1941. This change of scene also meant a change of language. Starting from The Real Life of Sebastian Knight and Bend Sinister, Nabokov would write his novels in English from now on. 

Lolita was born out of a short story from 1939, The Enchanter, but instead of the pseudo-charm of Humbert Humbert in the finished project, this predator is creepy, often compared to a spider. In this short story, he fails to seduce the young girl and kills himself. Lolita, to an extent, can been analysed to represent Nabokov's loss of Russia, and the narrator's attempt to regain lost love through any means possible. After losing his first love when he was 14, before he got the chance to consummate their relationship, Humbert becomes constantly stuck in the past- literally, he is only sexually attracted to young girls, whom he dubs "nymphets". These "nymphets" are between the ages of 9-14, often painted as sexually promiscuous and mystical. The majority of readers- as I sometimes did- will feel uncomfortable reading his descriptions of Dolores' legs and body, even divulging into laws about consent and trying to justify his obsessions. Try reading that on a busy London Underground train.

The themes of Lolita are common in previous Nabokov's novels. Humbert's aspiring adultery on Charlotte Haze, Dolores' mother, mirrors King, Queen, Knave and Laughter In The Dark. Yet, Lolita is also about cruelty, and the ways one justifies their cruelty for a common good. Although he indulges in Dolores, she is the one who speaks the least. Nabokov merely hints at her emotions, mainly because of Humbert's unreliable narration. This trick is pulled off in such a way, through his first person perspective to his rather romantic and delusional language, that at times I question the events of the novel. I am constantly left in the dark over Humbert's true intentions, and the events that happen outside of his perspective. Given Nabokov's notorious secrecy, and love of riddles and games, how can one truly understand Lolita other than the author?

The language of the novel, as with Nabokov's other novels, is simply beautiful, in stark contrast to the rather distressing subject matter. Take the famous opening lines, for example:

"Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta. She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita. Did she have a precursor? She did, indeed she did. In point of fact, there might have been no Lolita at all had I not loved, one summer, an initial girl-child. In a princedom by the sea. Oh when? About as many years before Lolita was born as my age was that summer. You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, exhibit number one is what the seraphs, the misinformed, simple, noble-winged seraphs, envied. Look at this tangle of thorns."

We are led to believe, right away, that his mission is a romantic one. Take the rather hyperbolic language, the combination of "sin", "fire", "soul", or what about the clever wordplay? The insistence of counting on a "murderer for a fancy prose style"? How can one not be seduced by this language? The flowery, pretentious language masks the horror of Dolores' abuses and softens the blow of her rape. The fact that this is technically meta-fiction, the novel's format being a confession for court, contributes to a sense of realism despite the fantastical claims that Humbert was in love with Dolores.

Lolita was first published by French publishing company Olympia Press in 1955. It would not be until 1958 where both America and England would agree to publish Lolita, given its incredibly controversial subject matter. Even today, some readers tend to attribute Humbert's thoughts and actions with that of Nabokov's, insisting that the novel reflects the novelist. However, this is fairly reactionary, as Nabokov seemingly toys with Humbert, setting him up for several falls. Nabokov, however, is not a moral writer. As mentioned before, he does not condemn Humbert's desires but does not condone them either. His sitting on the fence makes his viewpoint more dangerous to a reader. It's easier to side with a partisan than an all-rounder. 

Alas, Lolita's legacy should not be the thoughts of a "dirty old man", but a game of deception of what is and is not real. It is a chess game that Nabokov will always win, as he went to his grave not fully explaining Lolita. Perhaps it never was meant to be.