This book is pretty funny actually
>>8073979
"Stop it, boner" the book
>>8073979
Yup, as it was intended to be. Though most of the humor went over my head the first time I read it.
If you want light hearted and funny pick up Pnin
>>8073979
Finally, a beautiful cover for Lolita. Does anyone have examples of covers that don't feature a visual pun on a young girl's panties or crotch or other such sexual innuendo?
>>8074735
mine just has a white girl's face and lips accentuated
>>8074782
best one
>>8074735
by Sam Weber.
>>8074735
I've got the Penguin Essentials version and it's just a blonde girl eating an apple
>>8074735
Best are the ones that skip over the "visual pun" part.
>>8074796
Good cover, since the book is really about Humbert.
>>8074735
I have this one and I personally dislike the font choice for the title/author.
>>8074880
lmao
"Then I pulled out my automatic - I mean that is the kind of fool thing the reader might suppose I did."
if you didn't die laughing you're not my friend
>>8074735
Yeah, I think this one avoids innuendos.
>>8074910
>This cover was never actually released. Instead, the 50th anniversary edition was toned down, though quite simply so. In fact, a single 90-degree turn and a hue alteration changed this cover from offensive to universally tame.
aw
>>8074924
what a bunch of pussies
>>8074735
>>8074897
Why? I think the font face has a sort of innocence and cleanliness, which is what the editor was going for, I guess.
>>8074924
shucks
>implying if lolita was a video game it wouldn't be an infiltration third person shooter where you have to break into a girl's school, steal a sock, cum on it and return it before the guards notice one of them is tranq'd in the bushes
>>8074735
my cover
>>8075222
under my breath, in my mom's basement, i said "kek..."
>>8075155
Ok, maybe the title does not look that bad, but nabokov's name in that same font lowercase style seems artificial and unnecessarily .. fancy
>>8074880
i really believe this is the best book cover for it. i hate all the weird, faintly sexualized covers with young girls or adult women. it just totally ruins your perspective when reading it.
i love this cover because it actually shows the story for what it is: tragic and disturbing. humbert's reflection in lolita's tears conveys that message really well.
>>8075318
i'm aware this isn't an official cover, btw. i was looking at lolita cover redesigns (because the majority of the official ones are shit) and fell in love with this one. the person who made it really understood the book very well.
>>8075318
>i hate all the weird, faintly sexualized covers with young girls
They're literally just trying to sell copies.
Your cover looks like a retard drew it.
>>8075318
That cover is /r/im14andthisisdeep/ material lol
>>8075318
Lolita fucking wanted it.
>>8075371
Yeah she's one of those bitches who lies and says she got raped after you have totally consensual sex with her. They can go fuck themselves
>>8074735
that cover is disgusting. this one is the best
>>8073979
>putting a girl's face on the cover rather than allowing the reader to imagine her face based on Nabokov's prose
REEEEEEEE
This actually makes me pretty angry.
>>8075446
Whatever.
>>8074735
it's terrible. It's literally the YA version of the cover if lolita was a YA book.
50th anniversary is the best imo
This is the one I've got, pretty terrible.
I've got this one. Better than the other pengiun editions I've seen.
alright lit, ada or pale fire?
>>8075380
dude, she was like 12.....
>>8075694
I have an earlier version of that (Penguin Classics, silver livery), and the preceding Penguin Twentieth Century Classics (green livery) version with Balthus' "Girl and Cat".
>>8075474
Here's Lolita reviewed for a YA audience:
http://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2016/mar/01/lolita-vladimir-nabokov-review
>child's face on the cover
>>8075813
Probably the tamest pedophilic painting Balthus ever painted.
>>8075825
>Throughout reading this text and even for months afterwards I found myself asking the same questions over and over again... I slowly started to realise that Humbert was not a reliable narrator at all and although I had a lot of confusion about whether or not he truly was in love with Lolita, I came to the conclusion that the book is not a tragic love story about a forbidden relationship, it is about how a middle-aged man repeatedly took advantage of a young girl.
LMFAO
>>8074121
>I said nothing. I pushed her softness back into the room and went in after her. I ripped her shirt off. I unzipped the rest of her. I tore off her sandals. Wildly, I pursued the shadow of her infidelity; but the scent I travelled upon was so slight as to be practically indistinguishable from a madman's fancy.
Very bonerific passage though it loses a bit of its power when taken out of context.
>>8075813
dat butterfly
>>8076411
Lolita is romeo & juliet of 20th century
>>8076485
Well, Nabokov was a noted lepidopterist. (He preferred classification by inspection of the genitalia).
>>8076411
The hell? I just started reading earlier and I thought it was more about the struggles of a young man to overcome his childhood trauma, and to suppress the base urges with which that trauma afflicted him. Only now that he's stopped struggling against his carnal appetites and has progressed into a full on unabashed pedophile has it really gotten into any sort of situation where he's taking advantage of Dolores' grief and lack of options to bang her night after night.
I have little room to talk, but I think that reviewer may have missed the point
>>8076721
>He preferred classification by inspection of the genitalia
Well, I mean. Don't we all.
![maya_the_honey_bee_by_otenba_bekki-d4fn8ck[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/zu52mGh.jpg "maya_the_honey_bee_by_otenba_bekki-d4fn8ck[1].jpg")
>>8076827
surely it's not maya the honeybee
:3
>>8075318
looks like the first tattoo of a sexually confused psychology major w/ daddy issues
>>8075371
yeah maybe if you're a pedophile. to normal, non-autistic /lit/, humbert was twisted and unreliable. having a sexualized cover of lolita is what causes autists to think that she actually fucking wanted it.
>tl:dr get better reading comprehension skills and learn a few things about symbolism and literary analysis
>>8075358
this is literally the message the book is meant to convey.
>>8077001
She played him along. It's pretty obvious.
>>8077547
i can't tell what's bait and what isn't anymore
>>8077571
Lolita definitely wanted it at first.
>>8076816
>that reviewer may have missed the point
ya think?!
L0L that reviewer is a repressed idiot
>>8077001
>she actually fucking wanted it
two words for the clueless:
Clare Quilty
>>8074735
The one I borrowed from the library is like this.
>>8077685
Do you think Claire was actually impotent, as he claimed?
>>8077007
It really isn't.
