Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, about an academic named Humbert Humbertwho falls in love with a little girl, was published in the United States for the first time on this day in 1957. It had already been reviewed in The Nation by fiction writer George P. Elliott more than a year earlier.
Lolita was published in English two years ago in Paris, but it has not yet come out in this country…. I suppose our publishers are afraid that Lolita would bring them lawsuits for being pornographic and immoral. And pornographers would, I am sure, find it fairly satisfactory for their lewd fantasies. But only fairly satisfactory, for, likeUlysses before it, Lolita by high art transmutes persons, motives and actions which in ordinary life are considered indecent, into objects of delight, compassion and contemplation. Lolita will turn no reasonable citizen into a pornographer; the indecency in it, like the crime, is always seen with a clarity which does not encourage the fabricating of fantasies….The book’s chief offense, I guess, is that it presents a sexual pervert as a man to be known and pitied, a man of some essential dignity. Its other offense, perhaps as great, is that it satirizes in delighted detail our adman pandering to childishness, ease, vulgarity, titillation, mindlessness. Yet Lolita is not primarily a satire but a comedy of the exuberant Rabelaisian sort. It is superabundant in verbal energy (Nabokov’s command over American idiom is a marvel greater even than Conrad’s over literary English) and it heaps details of our daily life before us until it forces our wonder even more than our repugnance. It preserves that strange doubleness of comedy which creates in many a discomfort they resist…for you identify with, feel familiar with, see yourself in, a character whom you at the same time know to have performed abominable deeds. It transmutes, as only a great book could, this diseased man and this banal girl into people whom we know so well that they becomes others—not symbols, not types of Man, not aspects of ourselves, but persons towards whom we are permitted and encouraged and at last obliged to exercise our highest charity.
LOLZTA. By Vladimir Nabokov. The Olympia Press. Two volumes,
OO franca cach.
George P. ElIhnr
George P. ElIhnr
LOUTA was published in English two years ago in Paris, but it has not yet come out in this country, though Nab okov’s Fnin (a minor work) has rec iently been issued by Doubleday and though the next issue of Doubkday’s
A,wko Review will include a sizeable cixi pt houi Lulia. I uppue oui publ ishers are afraid that Lolis would
, bring them, lawsuits for being pornog raphic and immoral.
And pornographers would, I am sure, find it fairly.satisfactory for thcir lcwd
fantasies. But only fairly satisfactory, for, like Ulysses before it, Lol.iia by high art transmutes persons, motives and actions which in ordinary life are cons idered indecent, into objects of delight, compassion and contemplation. Lolisa wll turn no reasonable citizen into a pornographer; the indecency in it, like the crime, is always seen with a clarity which does not encourage the fabricati ng of fantasies.
The novel concerns an Americanized EU1UpV1IL uf iii:ddle yeiirs whose true love is only for’ “nymphets,” certain girls between nine and fourteen. He falls in love with one named Louita, a girl whom we discover to be an altog cthcr unexceptional child of the timca,
‘ ill-parented, traditionless, HollywoodL olita’ has been reviewed by the
U.S. Customs and has been found adm issible to this country.
Beyond its pedagogic value, which is obviously limited to artists,
this is a book of great. beauty for anybody. The pages of T1C
..MauSar Seed Cardc,s have a simple charm which is app
roached only’ by certain eighteenth century French masters of draping,
themselves of course greatly influenced by the Chinese, even by
this very book.. To illustrate her introduction, Miss Sze has chosen
some of the most splendid’ examples of Chinese painting and they are
perfectly reproduced. It is certainly one of the loveliest honks ever produced
•by the Bollingei Foundation, and alt hough $25 may look expensive here at the head of a review, with the actual book in hand it Jooks very cheap in- deed. I would hate to guess what it cost to produce. Certainly jt could not be sold at that price without subvention of the Mellon millions. +
ized, the prey of admen, but for whom he conceives a driving passion. In order to bc near Lolita, hc marries hcr widowe d mother. When the mother is killed
+ by accident, he runs off with his stepd aughter, living from motel to hotel all
+ over the country, with one interlude of” private schoçl for her. Although she earlier tempted him sexually and al though when the time came she did the actual seducing, yet his sustained passion and prodigious ‘sexual demands presently repel hr I-ic hçlds her by threat—she has ‘no + money and no one who will take care ‘of her. But he in + turn is the anxicius setvanr of her whims, for he knows that she will escape him (if only by maturing into adolescence). When finally she disappeais, he is + driven to insanity f a time and to dcapair; a’ few years lrcr lie finds her married to a workinginan and pregnant, a most ordinary girl. He discovers from her that a bad playwright and film writer named Quilty had helped her to esape and had then dropped ,her. At the end he murders Quiky.
Obviously the book concerns a dise ased man perlormrng immoral acts. But the book is no more immoral than
‘it is pornorphr. For we Innw from the foreword that the narrator is a criminal and mentally abnormal, and this knowl edge tempers our reaction to everything he says of himself. Most of all, both Nabokov and the maginary narrator, Humbert Humbert, are wholly unamb iguous about the morality of the acts
and motivcs. .
•by the Bollingei Foundation, and alt hough $25 may look expensive here at the head of a review, with the actual book in hand it Jooks very cheap in- deed. I would hate to guess what it cost to produce. Certainly jt could not be sold at that price without subvention of the Mellon millions. +
ized, the prey of admen, but for whom he conceives a driving passion. In order to bc near Lolita, hc marries hcr widowe d mother. When the mother is killed
+ by accident, he runs off with his stepd aughter, living from motel to hotel all
+ over the country, with one interlude of” private schoçl for her. Although she earlier tempted him sexually and al though when the time came she did the actual seducing, yet his sustained passion and prodigious ‘sexual demands presently repel hr I-ic hçlds her by threat—she has ‘no + money and no one who will take care ‘of her. But he in + turn is the anxicius setvanr of her whims, for he knows that she will escape him (if only by maturing into adolescence). When finally she disappeais, he is + driven to insanity f a time and to dcapair; a’ few years lrcr lie finds her married to a workinginan and pregnant, a most ordinary girl. He discovers from her that a bad playwright and film writer named Quilty had helped her to esape and had then dropped ,her. At the end he murders Quiky.
Obviously the book concerns a dise ased man perlormrng immoral acts. But the book is no more immoral than
‘it is pornorphr. For we Innw from the foreword that the narrator is a criminal and mentally abnormal, and this knowl edge tempers our reaction to everything he says of himself. Most of all, both Nabokov and the maginary narrator, Humbert Humbert, are wholly unamb iguous about the morality of the acts
and motivcs. .
despicable and brutal, and turpid, and
everything, rn.ais je t’Lc, je t’aim.ais! And there
were times when 1 knew how you felt, and it was hell to know it,
my little one.
And indeed he cld love her, for Hum- bert Humbert is’ a man, a whole, comic man. The book’s chief offense, I guess, is that it presents a sexual pervert as a + man to be known and pitied, a man of some essential dignity. Its other off ense, perhaps as great, is that it satir izes in delighted detail our adnan pandcring to childishness, case,, vulg arity, titillation,., mindlessness.
YET Lolita is not primarily a satire but a comedy of the exuberant RabelaiS ian sort. It is superabundant in verbal energy (Nabokov’s command over American idiom, is a marvel greater even than Conrad’s over ‘literary. tng1ish) and, it , heaps details of our daily life before us until it fnr’i’s our wonder even more than our repugnance. It preserves that., strange doubleness of comedy which creates inmany a discomfort they resist (Are You So Sure?), for you identify with, feel familiar with, see yourself in, a character whom you at the same time know to have performed abominable deeds. + Ii. transmutes, as
Another Important
Public A/mire Press book:
And indeed he cld love her, for Hum- bert Humbert is’ a man, a whole, comic man. The book’s chief offense, I guess, is that it presents a sexual pervert as a + man to be known and pitied, a man of some essential dignity. Its other off ense, perhaps as great, is that it satir izes in delighted detail our adnan pandcring to childishness, case,, vulg arity, titillation,., mindlessness.
YET Lolita is not primarily a satire but a comedy of the exuberant RabelaiS ian sort. It is superabundant in verbal energy (Nabokov’s command over American idiom, is a marvel greater even than Conrad’s over ‘literary. tng1ish) and, it , heaps details of our daily life before us until it fnr’i’s our wonder even more than our repugnance. It preserves that., strange doubleness of comedy which creates inmany a discomfort they resist (Are You So Sure?), for you identify with, feel familiar with, see yourself in, a character whom you at the same time know to have performed abominable deeds. + Ii. transmutes, as
Another Important
Public A/mire Press book:
