Lolita

by Vladimir Nabokov
Why Banned: Bad for Morality

Banning History:

Lolita is not currently banned; however, after its release in 1955, the novel was banned in France, England, Argentina, New Zealand, Burma, Belgium, Austria, Australia, and South Africa. The reasoning behind this move was fairly straightforward. These countries did not want minors reading such explicit, and “filthy” material. It wasn’t appropriate. Lolita was banned in France until 1958, in Australia from 1958-965, in England from 1955-1959, in South Africa from 1974-1982. The Cincinnati Public Library banned Lolita as well. Australia’s Literature Censorship Board in 1958 ruled the novel as “unhealthy,” and that “the fact that it is published by Olympia Press increases rather than lessens any doubt one might have about the writer’s intentions.” The Olympia Press is a Paris-based publisher, who produced the first copy of Lolita in 1955. Maurice Girodias founded Olympia Press, and by the 1950s it had a reputation for publishing pornographic, and lewd material. The South African Directorate of Publications banned the novel in 1974, but in Nov. 1982 it was taken off the banned list. Lolita was challenged, in novel form, as recent as 2006 at the Marion-Levy Public Library in Ocala, FL. Marion County commissioners voted to have the county attorney review the novel, and its themes of pedophilia and incest to determine if it met the state law’s definition of “unsuitable for minors.” In play form, Lolita was challenged in 2013. An article in The New Yorker covers how the show’s cast was jumped, and assaulted prior to opening night. The key defense for Lolita is that it puts in the spotlight child abuse, and pedophilia. It draws attention to an issue, that wasn’t really addressed prior to Lolita’s publishing in 1955. Because of this novel, studies on pedophilia and sexual abuse have developed and victims are coming forward

Author Bio

Vladimir Nabokov was born in St. Petersburg, Russia on April 22, 1899 to a prominent and rich Russian family of minor nobility. He was the oldest of five siblings and his parents encouraged him to develop his imagination and creativity. Growing up in a privileged family, Nabokov would oppose anti-Semitism on moral and aesthetic reasons, as a sign of “philistinism in all its phases… crude, moronic, and dishonest,” as he explained in 1967 to the Cleveland-born American Jewish author Herbert Gold. His family had to leave Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution moving to Livadiya and later England. Nabokov studied Slavic and Romance languages in Trinity College, Cambridge and then moved to Berlin where he married a Jewish Russian woman. They lived in Berlin for fifteen years before moving to the United States in 1940 when German troops began advancing. Nabokov worked at Wellesley College, as well as Harvard, as resident lecturer in comparative literature and Russian and European literature at Cornell University, where he began writing Lolita. In his afterword to Lolita he claimed: "My private tragedy, which cannot, and indeed should not, be anybody's concern, is that I had to abandon my natural idiom, my untrammeled, rich, and infinitely docile Russian tongue for a second-rate brand of English, devoid of any of those apparatuses--the baffling mirror, the black velvet backdrop, the implied associations and traditions which the native illusionist, frac-tails flying, can magically use to transcend the heritage in his own way." As a writer, Nabokov has always been praised immensely for his use of complex and original plots clever alliteration and wordplay. Lolita's success allowed Nabokov to move to Switzerland where he became a full time writer.

"Contemporary Reviews" Review

The novel Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov was written in English and first published in 1955 in Paris, coming to the states in 1958 in New York. This novel has gained infamous notoriety for its controversial subject: the obsessively delusional “love affair” of the protagonist and narrator, a 38 year old literature professor called Humbert Humbert with 12 year old Dolores Haze.  Lolita immediately attained a classic status after its publication becoming one of the most controversial examples of 20th century literature.
Common, reoccurring themes in these contemporary reviews are the juxtaposition of elegant literary technique and the pornographic subject matter. However, the immoral aspect of the book lies in Humbert’s inhumane treatment of Lolita (Malcolm, D.F). Humbert’s realized fate throughout the novel is a classic tragedy, wooing the reader to side with H.H. as he takes full advantage of the death of his wife, Charlotte, the mother of Lolita. The New York Times 1958 review by Elizabeth Janeway refers to this tragedy as, “a most perfectly realized expression of the moral truth that Shakespeare summed up in the sonnet that begins, ‘The expense of spirit in a waste of shame/ Is lust in action.’” This has everything to do with Humbert’s internal battle of his conscience. Although Nabokov portrays Humbert clearly as a psychopath, this is overshadowed by his primary resistance of corrupting Lolita’s innocence.  Janeway goes on to say that Nabokov is writing exclusively about lust. She goes on to compare Nabokov’s writing to the exploitation of the media’s sexually driven influence on the attraction of youth in order for the reader to gain an unconscious identification with Humbert’s agonies. This is why Nabokov’s writing is so tragically poetic. He is using pathos to relate the pain held within selfishness stemming from all passion, greed, and urges that lie within all of us. The difference between us and Humbert is that he insists on being satisfied without regard to the effect it has upon the people that inhabit his life.
An underexplored theme of these contemporary reviews is Nabokov’s portrayal of Humbert’s internal struggle between his wounded conscience and his instincts during the fulfillment of his fantasy. “The portrayal is what makes Dostojewski an artist. Nobody has depicted more terribly than he the very dregs of human behavior; but nobody has shown better than he the inner war waged by the voice of conscience.” Humbert shows zero remorse at the superimposition of his sexual needs made upon a child in his actions. This is what makes the book so immoral, there is the insinuation that anybody can “get away with it.” As much as he has made up his mind that what he is doing is wrong, he continuously reminds Lolita that she would be worse off if she were to discontinue his sexual relationship with her. Not to mention how dangerous it is to the heterosexual youth of America to teach that rape and pedophilia is inconsequential when one is “careful” or “compromises” on the others behalf.
Many reviews also comment on the satirical and ironic elements of the novel. To the End of Time Review in TIME magazine mentions Nabokov himself validates the idea that Lolita will be attacked on moral grounds, but humorously questions the response he received from some U.S. publishers. “One firm, he notes, offered to publish the book three years ago if he turned Lolita from a girl into a boy-homosexuality presumably being much more acceptable than nymphet-mania.” This shouldn’t be humorous but again reassures the shaky moral ground he stands upon writing Lolita in the first place. It is a complete ironic mind fuck that a publishing company would actually suggest this.
            The emotional self pitying, apathetic undertones are disguised by a consistent beautiful use of literary devices. These devices utilize pathos. Aristotle suggested that speakers persuade audiences using three modes of appeal, ethos, logos, and pathos. Pathos is emotional persuasion channeled through Humbert’s unfortunate past and his one sided view of things throughout the narration. Nabakov is trying to trick the reader using manipulative language to side with a pedophile and a rapist. There is not a twelve year old in the history of the world that is mature enough for a physical relationship, even if they believe they are. A man who takes on a role as a father should be a safe place for a child, not a two way street.

 

Bibliography

Janeway, Elizabeth. “The Tragedy of Man Driven by Desire.” The New York Times.  (August 17,1958). Web. 10 Sept. 2014.

Malcolm, D.F. “Books: Lo, the Poor Nymphet.” The New Yorker 34:195+. (November 8, 1958). Web. 10 Sept. 2014.

“To The End Of Night.” Time 72.9 (1958): 64. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Sept. 2014.

Vitale, B.R. “LOLITA (Book).” One 6.10 (1958): 31. LGBT Life with Full Text. Web. 10 Sept. 2014.

Wikipedia contributors. “Lolita.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 8 Sep. 2014. Web. 12 Sep. 2014.

Discussion Questions

If Lolita's character was a boy would this change the morality of the book?

Has this book changed any of your thoughts on sexual abuse?

Does Lolita end up filling a femme fatale role in the second part of the novel? How has her character changed? 

How Lolita, and Humbert's relationship plays out in the novel reflect a bigger societal problem

Does H.H. actually love Lolita? Does he ever see Lolita as an actual person or just an obsession? Are there ways that the reader can see Lolita as an actual person that Humbert might not see