Reply to Lolita

Forum Index » The DCUM Book Club

Reply to "Lolita"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don’t know what you expect to get from the synopsis— that’s probably the worst way to engage with literature or art. It’s like me saying Robert Mapplethorpe took pictures of penises— what do you think of that?[/quote]

NP.  Even if the photos are "arty", not interested in a gallery full of that kind of art.  Likewise, I've skimmed bits of Lolita to better understand the cultural references and the Nabokov phenomenon.  Came away with...it's pretty gross, I still don't understand Nabokov-worship, and I don't have enough life left to waste time on a full read-through.

A lot of stuff that people liked in the 50s-70s because the works were topically transgressive seem pretty shite now.  I read Myra Breckinridge once while stuck at a ski cabin...another trashy but (once) popular novel.  The World According to Garp, etc.  Lolita's just slightly more literary than those.  Because Nabokov was fancier...foreign, academic, etc.
[/quote]

It’s fine if you want to make a judgment about how you want to spend your time based on entirely superficial characterizations as long as you get that that’s all they are (and calling Lolita a slightly fancier World According to Garp is barely even that). [/quote]

PP.  How is a preference a superficial characterization?  I read Garp when I was a kid and didn't know any better, lol. As a grownup, I don't have to make time for books that read as boring and revolting to ME.  Both books contain titillating material, were written by revered male writers, and seem kind of dated.  That's my point.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics