This is the first book I've started to read since high school, and the first book I've been actively interested in. I very much want to complete this book, however...>At first, Lo had refused "to try what it was like," but curiosity and camaraderie prevailed, and soon she and Barbara were doing it by turns with the silent, coarse and surly but indefatigable Charlie...
I don't think I can take this. I don't think this was intended to have this big of an impact on the reader, but I can't shake it. I feel defeated FOR Humbert.
Are there any books similar in subject matter to this that anyone could recommend?
>>7394275
that's because he's an UNRELIABLE SCUMBAG NARRATOR and you've BOUGHT into the lies just like you're supposed to. He's a professor and incredibly intelligent, so he's spinning everything to make you sympathetic.
The man is a child rapist and kidnapper
keep reading you weak-willed punkass
>>7394281
I'll rape you!
>>7394281
>UNRELIABLE SCUMBAG NARRATOR
If that's the case, that's quite the spoiler. However, you've made a solid case for me to stick with it.
Does he drop any fictitious accounts of Lo getting handled by anyone other than him? I don't care how depraved it gets, as long as it's only him and Lo.
>>7394298
it's not a spoiler at all
he says at the beginning how horrible he is and that it's his diary and recollection
of course his diary will be biased
>>7394304
There's biased, and then there's making up stories that mesh with actual events. I've been assuming he's always been truthful.
But that's not the point. The point is I am weak-willed and can't bear impurities pushed on to Lo coming from anyone other than Humbert. Is that little Camp Q tale the end of it? Because he's been making references to possible lesbian encounters left and right leading up to this one with Charlie.
>>7394320
>impurities pushed on to Lo from anyone other than Humbert
you do understand that he raped her right
The book gave me many boners and I'm not even a pedophile.
Fuck you, Humbert.
>>7394320
not the other guy, but they could be fantasies or Humbert feeling exactly what you are feeling. Fear that she has already been "ruined"/taken/in love with someone else. It ruins the idea of his romantic love for her(wants to bone a 11(?) year old, that she's already been with others. May or may not be true.
>>7394320
1st rule of reading: never trust the narrator. Did you not do Gatsby in high school like every other American kid?
>>7394338
Nick was pretty reliable tho
>>7394323
Did he? Doesn't Humbert say she seduced him? Is that the unreliable narrator? Even if unreliable how can you make the assumptions that he raped her? Unless it's in terms of manipulated for toys or whatever he bribes her with.
>>7394323
Being raped still counts as impurities, doesn't it? At the point I'm at in the book, it reads as if she started it. My question still hasn't been answered: Does he continue to rattle on about her experiences with others, whether it be male or female?
>>7394335
>It ruins the idea of his romantic love for her
I wish that was expressed after she had told him. It feels like I'm affected by something he doesn't even mention.
>>7394338
The English class was handled in my school, you barely had to know any of what happened in order to get a good grade. Macbeth is the only thing I have any memory of from high school.
>>7394348
she's an 11 year old girl and he's a pedophile. She doesn't grasp sex. When he thinks she's being flirtacious, she's literally just being a girl and not trying to "seduce" him. I read the book back a few years ago and didn't really love it so I can't say I remember everything that Humbert recounts, but I can promise you he rapes her. And as you get further in there are scenes where she's crying and screams at him, disrupting the false reality he's created, giving a glimpse as to what's really going on
>>7394356
>She doesn't grasp sex.
But, he said she's had encounters before!
>>7394363
Is this possibly his justification to the reader? The "Reader, it was her who seduced me" paraphrased as I haven't read the novel for years, is him belittling the idea that he is corrupting her, she is either already corrupted or already mature enough to understand what she is doing(implied by humpy)?
>>7394351
>Does he continue to rattle on about her experiences with others, whether it be male or female?
Do you really want us to spoil the book for you?
>>7394363
you should really read the wikipedia summary up to the point you're at since you've missed out on a lot of what's going on. But the text does lead it like she had sex with a kid at camp and then intitates it with Humbert, but he just drugged her with a sleeping sedative and he's quite excited, so what actually happens here is up for you to decide
>>7394345
Reread Nick's opening and try again
>>7394380
No, but does that really play that vital of a role in the rest of it?
>>7394377
>Is this possibly his justification to the reader?
I think it's fair to look at it that way, but is the truth ever revealed? Or are we left to our interpretations? I'm still new to literature.
>>7394383
>you've missed out on a lot of what's going on
I assumed that, I'm not too good at reading. I'll do that.
>he just drugged her with a sleeping sedative
Is not knowing the truth part of the fun? He explained it well enough, saying it wasn't part of the barbiturate family and the fact he hadn't even tested it out. I've been taking everything Humbert says as plain fact.
>>7394397
I think you have to ask why he's saying what he's saying. she seduced me, it wasn't a proper barbiturate, she was already experienced. I would say that essentially is justification to himself/or the reader for what he's doing.
It's not a barbiturate, therefore I'm not really drugging her. etc.
>>7394348
That's what rapists say, you unbelievable tool.
"I didn't rape her, she was totally asking for it"
Humbert is an unreliable narrator because he's a pedophile convincing himself that he's not doing anything wrong.
>>7394420
I have said that after my post, it wasn't entirely meant as it sounds, you interpreted.
>>7394411
That makes sense. A lot of early scenes where he describes her coming on to him didn't feel right. Some of them seemed like he could have gotten something he wanted. Whether it be a kiss, a hug, a grope, or building towards something that would make her want him more. Maybe that was just him painting her as in love with him from the start.
>>7394320
>I've been assuming he's always been truthful.
Then, quite frankly, you're not too smart. He basically shouts it in-between the lines.
>>7394417
>says he is a man who is inclined to reserve all judgements
>spends the rest of the novel overtly expressing his judgements of other characters in order to paint Gatsby in a comparatively good light
>>7394443
y'know what, that's a good catch and a fair one
>>7394433
Please don't call him Humpy that makes him sound too likeable and damn it I don't want to like him
>>7394348
Are you retarded?
>>7394397
Don't feel bad for not getting it right away. Lolita is mostly characterized by it's dense yet rich prose. The author, Nabokov, had control over the language like none other. (which, of course, carries over to Humbert. the pretty prose serves only to sway you away from what is actually going on)
>>7394348
lmao
