Meaning of the Work as a Whole

Hello and welcome to my fifth (and final!😔) post! In this post, as I mentioned last time, I'm going to be talking about the meaning of Lolita as a whole and the things I was able to take away from reading it, both of which I've had plenty of time to think about since I finished the book a little over a week ago. Hey, I don't need to do any plot summary this time! That makes a nice change.

I think there are several things that the reader can take away from reading Lolita; I know I certainly did. This book exposed me to very new and twisted ideas of love that I have never really thought about or considered before. For example, the fact that your own expectations and attractions in love could stem from a childhood experience, as Humbert's own perceptions of love came from his own relationship with Annabel. Also, even though the circumstances are very different, Lolita also reminded me of love's numerous toxic aspects. Humbert, though his narrative told the reader of his desperate and unconditional love for Lolita, never actually took Lolita's thoughts or feelings into account and treated her in a manner that clearly and unabashedly served his own needs only. On the very first page of the book, Humbert says, "She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at school. She was Dolores on the dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita." Although at first this may seem as though he is considering Lolita as someone completely different and extra special to him, I have come to view this quote as an excuse for his overall treatment of her. He uses the phrase "in my arms" chiefly because he basically views Lolita as a sexual plaything whom he can just have his way with and mistakes this for love, and he does not see her as a happy, potential-filled child as others may. Only toward the end of the book does he realize the selfishness of his actions and lament about it (supposedly; we can't exactly trust Humbert's super one-sided version of the story). Again, even though these disturbing circumstances are super rare and unique, the major principles still apply to real life: one-sided relationships where one person takes and takes from the other with no regard for their mental health or wants/needs is toxic and hurts at least one of the people involved. I think the idea of love (the "love" shared between Humbert and Lolita, the book's two main characters, is what I'm talking about here) is developed in a super interesting way in Lolita. At first, Humbert basically admires her from a distance; this is how he falls in love with her. The way he talks about her kind of tricks the reader (or, at least, me) into thinking he'd cherish and value everything about her when he eventually "gets" her, but this isn't the case; like I mentioned before, he treats her as something he's won and can treat in any way he wants because she doesn't have anywhere else to go anyway with her mother dead. Eventually, only when Lolita leaves him at last does Humbert realize he's been treating her poorly and robbed her of her childhood. To me, this enforces the belief that you don't really know what you had until it's gone, resulting in Humbert being full of regret about the way things were when they were together. While this in some cases is a cliche in love stories gone bad, it still reenforces the takeaway that I had about the toxicity of a relationship such as this.

Another major takeaway from Lolita is basically a lesson for me to watch out for smooth talkers. As foolish and potentially humorous as that seems, it's true; Humbert's beautiful language in writing the book does its best to woo the reader into seeing his perverted story from his somewhat logical point of view. I read in someone else's blog post about the similarity here to the new Netflix series "Abducted in Plain Sight," in which the rapist uses his charm and smooth language skills to trick the parents into trusting him around their pre-teen daughter (and, as a APPALLING added bonus, having his way sexually with the two of them as well...). This shows that Lolita, though fictional, tells a story that could very much happen in real life. I don't really think that Humbert's language proficiency needed to really be developed as the book progressed; rather, it was something that draws the reader in right off the bat and allowed the reader to be lulled into a false sense of security by Humbert and begin to trust him. In a sense, the reader's perception of Humbert's language style is what develops, not the actual language itself. I think this is a super interesting way for Nabokov to write a book, and it certainly works in an unnerving fashion and messes with the reader's head.

As for a thematic idea in Lolita that our class has already seen in other books we've read so far, I think the no-brainer here is absolutely human connection. Most of us seek human connection from lovers roughly our own age (or not so different that it becomes illegal), Humbert's attraction to others has frozen in time when he was "dating" a twelve-year-old girl named Annabel. In other words, Humbert only seeks connection (real connection, I mean; not connection he uses to cover up for his abnormality, like when he got married to Valeria) from nymphets, or other pretty twelve-year-old girls. Because fulfillment of Humbert's attraction to nymphets is so rare until he meets Lolita, he is basically deprived of any human connection that means anything to him since Annabel. He claims to be in love with Lolita, but in reality, he has no idea how to treat her or anyone else because of his complete and utter lack of love and relationships in his life. For this reason (as well as MANY others, of course) Lolita is completely miserable with Humbert. This whole aspect of human connection is a topic we also found in Brave New World, where people are incapable of feeling basically anything at all or forming real relationships, The Handmaid's Tale, where women's roles are to get pregnant or serve as figureheads instead of forming real relationships with other people, and Song of Solomon, where love-craving women are treated terribly by men whose focus is on wealth, not forming relationships with their lovers. What we see in Lolita is just basically yet another spin on the theme of human connection.

Well, that's about it. Thanks to everyone for reading my blog posts; it's been a lot of fun reading Lolita (never thought I'd use the words "fun" and "Lolita" in the same sentence, but here we are) and sharing my thoughts with you guys as well as reading and thinking about your comments! I can't wait to read your last blogs as well. Bye now! :)