This got extremely depressing towards the end.
I wanted H. Humbert and Lo to live happily ever after.
Life is not fair.
>read book expecting ambivalent psychological profile of a pervert
>discover tale about a patrician who boinks underage girls
>tfw you will never be patrician OR boink underage girls
>tfw Lolita gives you the greatest literary feel of all
>>7393681
Humbert was kinda Fedora to be quite honest with you lads
>>7393681
He was a sick fuck man.
>>7393698
I suppose I fell for it then. I really did sympathize with him.
>>7393681
im not a plebe and i have boinked an underage b&
it's not what it's all cracked up to be
>>7393719
>it's not what it's all cracked up to be
What the fuck does that even mean. Maybe not for you then, to other people it surely is.
>>7393680
>wanting a pedophile to live "happily" with a small child
I hope you realize this is evidence of how easily influenced you are
>>7393719
Same here butit was great.
I would manually throw ten thousand twentysomething women into a ditch and set them on fire if I could grab one 16 year old girl's juicy thigh for ten seconds in exchange.
>>7393723
She's 12 - 17 in the book, how is that a "small child"?
>>7393726
You could always emigrate
ITT: Redditors and Amerifats who get triggered by the very notion of someone under 18 being sexual
>>7393796
lmao kill yourself
lolita is reddit tier fuck this shitty meme book and all its faggot pedo fans
I cried like a bitch reading the last few chapters desu.
Girls always ruin shit.
In and out of my heart flowed my rainbow blood.
>>7393680
they did
>>7393796
I got a boner when Alex raped the two not even 10 year old devotchka's in Clockwork Orange.
It's just a European thing.
Amerilards don't understand.
>>7394049
They were 11 in the book, from what I remember.
>>7393680
nabokov would hate you
he was making fun of people who get emotionally attached to plot and characters instead of mirin dat dere prose from an ironic aesthete distance
youre """"literally"""" emma bovary, kill yourself
>>7393796
Hello, Scaruffi.
>>7394060
What if I just happen agree with Humbert's morals and way of thinking?
>>7394065
post still applies
>>7394070
In that case I don't care, I don't see anything wrong with developing emotional attachment to a story or its characters.
>>7394051
Here, took this pic from my 'restored edition' for you.
>>7394065
I suppose Nabokov wouldn't hate a pedo aesthete who admires "Lolita" from a critical distance.
All his books have some weird form of sexuality, anyway, so it's clear Nabokov was full of shit when he said "I got the idea for Lolita reading about monkeys in a cage xD"
Lolita - pedo
Pale Fire - homo borderline pedo
Ada or Ardor - incest
Seriously, though, he's doing what Flaubert did in Madame Bovary. Shifting your focus away from characters/plot towards prose.
>>7394071
>In that case I don't care
but you would care if it didn't apply to you?
plebs these days, i swear...
>>7394077
no aberrant sexuality in luzhin's defense
>>7394084
That's why it's considered an second-rate work.
>>7394091
by plebs sure
>>7393713
Pretty sure that's what Nabokov was going for. Look anon, you sympathized with subhuman pedophile trash
>>7394111
Humbert Humbert was a respectable man.
>>7394115
>sperged out whenever a girl sat on his lap
>moved to america
>not that rich
>not gentry
>got out played by a literal 12 year-old
>married to some random suburban woman
"respectable"
>>7394130
But that prose mate. that fucking prose.
>>7394729
writing is not a respectable skill
Humpy Hump had some nice girly
All them folk now be all surly,
The girls themselves too had some funs,
We know Humbert did with them cute buns.
WTF!
>>7394974
Senpai?
>>7394074
Why isn't this banned?
That's just disgusting.
Impressive picture quality though anon.
>>7394077
That's a reasonable reading. But don't you think the characters are important, given the commentary Nabokov was making on the nature of art and the sublime?
The prose itself only gets you so far in terms of theme. I don't think it's reasonable to discount the structure, plot, and characters, unless I'm just misreading what you're saying.
Guys, will I look weird if I'm reading this book in public?
>>7393680
>>7393726
>16 year old
Too old.
>>7396540
>I don't think it's reasonable to discount the structure, plot, and characters
you must be new here
>>7394060
He disparaged readers who identify with characters, which is not necessarily the same thing as becoming emotionally attached to plot and characters.
>>7396540
> the commentary Nabokov was making on the nature of art and the sublime?
Read: "On a Book Entitled "Lolita""
>I don't think it's reasonable to discount the structure, plot, and characters
Aside from style, Nabokov also cared about structure.
>>7396540
>I don't think it's reasonable to discount the structure, plot, and characters
Triggered
>>7393723
>I hope you realize this is evidence of how easily influenced you are
Only plebs aren't easily influenced by beauty.
True intellectuals are moved by beauty and beauty only, nothing else matters to them.
>>7393680
She pretty much hated him the whole time. And once she grew up he would have lost interest anyways
>>7394074
Holy shit. Is the entire book written in that made-up patois with all the nonce words?
>>7400611
Yup. Nadsat, Burgess was a linguist, it's a form of a form of Russian-influenced English.
I do have to ask how a young gloopy malchick like you don't know this already?
Even if you haven't read the book, you surely must have seen the movie?
You are fluent in it by page 15. It adds to the story.
>>7393681
>mfw I (have) fulfill(ed) one of thoseAnd it isn't being patrician
So for specificsyou won't get any beyond the fact she was 13
A sad tale about a stunted adult being exploited by a sexually overactive teenager.
>>7393796
Americans would be the last one to get triggered because of that considering their teenage pregnancy rates is off the roofs
