Cam’s answer to “is this book disturbing in bits?” > Likes and Comments

39 likes · 
Comments Showing 1-10 of 10 (10 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Karen (new)

Karen Yes, you nailed it.


message 2: by Greg (new)

Greg Cam, yes! "Fantasically creepy."


message 3: by Maria (new)

Maria Germanova couldn't have said it better


message 4: by Daniela (new)

Daniela I was going to answer this question but you put into words exactly what I think. Right on.


message 5: by Bry (new)

Bry Willis I believe the correct nomenclature is 'ephebophile' and not 'paedophile'.


message 6: by Daniela (new)

Daniela No. Lolita is 10 when they meet.


message 7: by Bry (new)

Bry Willis She's 12 when they initially meet, actually.


message 8: by Daniela (new)

Daniela It's true, I looked it up afterwards. I think it is still pedophilia though.


message 9: by Bry (new)

Bry Willis Not that this has anything to do with the literary merit of Lolita, but Wikipedia (I know, right), defines paedophilia as 'when a person sixteen years of age or older is primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to children who have not begun puberty (generally eleven years old or less)', and it defines hebophilia as 'persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent (early adolescent) children (especially those showing Tanner stages 2-3 of development), typically ages 11–14'.

As Lolita goes, HH is interested in girls (nymphets, in particular) aged 9 - 15, so the character is a bit of a cross-over, though he specifically prefers 'maturing' females over 'immature' or 'mature' ones, so there's that.

Separately, HH is an unreliable narrator, so one can't even quite be sure of what, if anything, in his narration is true.


message 10: by jessie (new)

jessie what the hell is wrong with you humbert humbert is literally a disgusting human being who should be shot like a dog


back to top