Re: Lolita's Story To Be Printed in US

jason varsoke (jjv@caesun.msd.ray.com)
Fri, 18 Jun 1999 06:25:18 -0400 (EDT) 

On Fri, 18 Jun 1999, Camille Scaysbrook wrote:

> Chris Ohlhoff wrote:
> > Is anyone interested in reading this rip-off, er, I mean, book?
> 
>Camille wrote:
> Hmmm. And that's quite a long hmmm. Personally those dreadful `Sequel to
> Gone With the Wind/Pride and Prejudice' etc churn my stomach in the same
> way cover bands do young musicians starting out: because they drain away
> money and interest from where the real stuff is. If it's a clever
> postmodern petit-historie, I'll take a look. If it's a cynical cash in, I
> may borrow it from the library in about three years' time. The fact that
> this is receiving publicity whereas last year's publication of the short
> story on which `Lolita' itself was based (long thought to be lost; even
> Nabokov himself told the world he had incinerated it) got through with
> barely a whisper probably says it all.
> 

   The reason that I won't read this book is that parodies the original.
I think this writer too the easy way out.  The situation is extremely
uncomfortable, an older man loving a young girl.  Nab takes us from
revoltion to pure-empathy.  His brilliance starts in the first two
lines.  (going from memory here) "Lolita, love of my life, fire in my
loins." (here we are revolted (having read the back cover)) "Lo-li-ta,
three taps of the tongue against the roof the the mouth . . ." At this
point every reader worth his spit is trying it out, saying Lo-li-ta and
feeling the tapping of the tongue.  He has you in the second sentence!
Already, you ARE Humbert Humbert, you are the narrator.  Or at least the
psychological distance of the reader is measured in angstroms.  In the
first sentence you are miles way and still he reels you in.  It's amazing,
it's brilliant.
   In the rest of the book Nab seduces us into loving the little girl, or
at least in really believing that Humbert loves her.  It's goddamn
romatic.  No shoddy writer could pull this off.
   However, to parody an effect that is balanced on a pin, to topple it,
is no major feat.  It isn't even worth consideration.  It takes no effort
to poke fun at Humbert.  That's where the reader initially started before
_Lolita_.  She is just bringing us back to not understanding Humbert,
instead of bringing us to understanding Lo.
   Now, if she were to seriously consider Lo's perspective it might be
interesting.  That is, if she were considered actually in love with
Humbert.  I think even in Nab's version you can tell that Lo mocks Humbert
most of the time.  Looking closely we see how she plays him, how she uses
him, how she mocks him.  So what is this new author showing us?  What
truth is she revealing?  Why do we care?
   We don't.  Or at least I don't.  That's why I won't read the new novel.

Cam, do you know where i can find the original short story?

-j