Weirdly the discomfort of it made me want to keep reading more. Nabokov has a uniquely intriguing prose. What would the world be like if we could do more than just hear other people’s perspectives but actually try them on like they’re a pair of glasses? Would more good people turn bad or would more bad people turn good? Maybe nothing would change. Personally, I related to Humbert in the ways through which he perceived provincial life and conventional people. Narrative persuasion is an eerie phenomenon.

The “romance” and obsession is so heavily romanticized that I’m gonna assume a lot of readers left this book feeling like Humbert actually was a dedicated and caring lover who was self aware of his wrongdoings but was overall just hurt by his tragic circumstances and overwhelmed by nothing more than pure love… meaning you realize he’s a pedophile but the sympathy heavily lingers. To that I just want to say: learn to be less trusting.
Since this book is not written in the present time of Humberts life it makes me wonder if his memories are meant to be very accurate. Human memory in general is not incredibly accurate and aside from his …atypical.. moral compass, should we have questioned his memory as well? After all, he wrote this for the jurors; he knows we are not his friend and he knows we can easily forget that. In the same sense that Humbert plays games with other characters and admits to playing dumb, creating lies, etc, why would that not cross over into his relationship with the reader? So I was distrusting as I read in more ways than just the obvious. There is obvious narrative persuasion that’s mentally easier to harness and break away from if you are somebody who reflects frequently. The imbedding of subtle persuasion was probably what creeped me out the most. How do we know that Mrs. haze was actually THAT possessive or crazy? Or again when he remembers how she fell on her knees proclaiming that he was “her ruler and her god” ?? I know this woman is annoyingly predictable and irritatingly conventional but I’d like to give her more credit than to easily believe this overly dramatic replay of a conceivably feeble memory.

I was also really inspired by Humbert and Lo’s exploration of the country… which was also incredibly disturbing … but if you disconnect their traveling from a kidnapping rapist sorta stand point – I want to explore the country like that.

Also side note: at some point I realized Humbert’s character reminds me of Lester Burnham in the film “American Beauty.” There were a lot of the same themes.. the intolerance for a dull world of people that don’t “notice the falsity of everyday conventions and rules of behavior” … the eyes for a younger girl that is somehow the anecdote to surviving those same dull conventions.. and the entitled behavior that eventually bubbles over into conversation with their wives when they can no longer continue pretending they enjoy the fake world around them.
I researched this a little bit and found that other people came to the same conclusion about Lester Burnham and Humbert Humbert. I think Humbert is largely more narcissistic which makes up for the spine that Lester Burnham lacks for a large portion of the film but for anyone who has seen American Beauty and is considering reading Lolita, I’d say it’s an interesting comparison to explore.
I didn’t mean to write such a lengthy review but I guess this is my long winded version of saying that I really enjoyed this book and all the weird ways that it made me question more than just the sanity of the main character but also the authenticity of every event and detail retold. It made me think. A lot.