Why is this book a masterpiece?

[Kyran]

I recently finished reading this book. I am bit skeptical about considering it as a great literary masterpiece as it is generally accepted. If you think it is why you think it is? And if you don't think it is, why not?

[Streunendekatze]

I don't. It's shite. People love perversion and purple prose.

[Dante]

I don't care much for the entire book but the first paragraph alone is a masterpiece of writing for me.

[Easytarget]

The way you phrased your question answered it for you. You didn't like it, so don't dwell on it, move on and read something else.

Nothing could be more tiresome than inviting others to convince you why something is art.

[Kiri Fiona]

Do I consider it a literary masterpiece? Yes. It was well written and controversial, and it makes people feel things other than plain ol' hatred and disgust for it's pedophile protagonist. That takes skill, and Nabokov deserves his awards and praise for that.

Did I like it? Shit, no. My soul feels dirty for having been inside Humbert's head.

[Urska]

If you're asking because you're really interested, then I would recommend watching this video lecture from prof. Nick Mount https://podfanatic.com/podcast/big-id...
When I first read it I found it nothing special, either, but some years later I read it again and especially after I was able to get my hands on the audiobook version read by Jeremy Irons (highly recommended!) I finally got it's artistic value. The lecture helped me understand it even better.

As for liking it, well... I really enjoyed mr.Irons' narration and the story as such, if I managed to ignore the fact that the fictional narrator is a disgusting pedophile. But keep in mind that, one, it's a made up story and two, it is its intention to disturb you, so you actually win if you can remain at least partly undisturbed :)

[Gary]

It's definitely a masterpiece. Whether you enjoyed the reading experience or not is another matter. Given the content, it's perfectly reasonable for people to hate the book, and I'll say flat out that there are a lot of parts that I find very difficult and extremely unpleasant to read. Personally, I find the whole section about Delores supposedly losing her virginity before Humbert drugs and rapes her to be very unpleasant reading, for instance. I've read the book maybe eight or ten times, but I have to put it down for a bit (days sometimes) once or twice to get through that section.

But that's part of the reason it's a masterpiece. It captures the mindset of Humbert in a way that no other work had up until that point, and—I'd argue—has since. Art isn't necessarily meant to be happy or amuse. It's meant to convey something more than the sum of its parts. Lolita does that as well or better than any other work of art that I can think of. Hence, a masterpiece.

[Pojar]

Gary: "It's definitely a masterpiece. Whether you enjoyed the reading experience or not is another matter."
--

Definitely. The prose alone is enough to rank it among the best novels of (relatively) recent times.
That said, there's more.

Nabokov admitted there is a subjacent level of reading in his novel in interviews in the 60s. In one of them he said:

"(Lolita) was like the composition of a beautiful puzzle - its composition and its solution at the same time, since one is mirror view of the other, depending on the way you look".

And indeed, there are phenomenons of reflexion in the novel (e.g. Trapp / Pratt; widow Haze / widow Hays; Blanche Schwarzman / Melanie Weiss (*)).

(*) Blanche (="white" in French), Schwarz (="black" in German) and Melanie (="black", "dark", from "melanos" in ancient Greek), Weiss (= "white" in German).

The recurrent keywords (e.g. "rose, "chestnuts", etc...) and numbers (342, 52, etc...) in the novel are also hinting to this.

Here is a link treating the the subject if you're interested:

http://lolitasriddle.blogspot.com/2014/10/lolitas-riddle-solved.html

.

[P.K.]

Hi Pojar. I'm new, hence the lateness of my response to your above comment about Nabokov. I will comment further in the more recent Was Nabakov a Paedofile debate. I just wanted to thank you for the link to lolitasriddle.blogspot. This knocked me out. A treatise of literary importance which puts all debates about Nabokov and Lolito into perspective. Thank you. Do you know who the author, Wag, is?
PeeK

[Diego]

It is. It`s not only written beautifully, but the way he describes Lolita goes beyond sexual and physical attraction, the way Nabokov describes Lolita is the way love should be described.

[[deleted user]]

I really enjoyed this book, the way it was written it captured me since the begining. When reading everythought that came to Humberts mind and how he saw things in a different way, Like getting inside how a pedophile thinks.
Controversial ? Yes. It made it pretty tough to imagine some parts, even at one point I didnt even know how to feel about him.

[Emily]

The fact that people feel so strongly about Humbert (i.e: I felt gross being in his head, etc.) lends itself to (at the very least) being an impressive piece of literature, as people are feeling emotions and sensations that can only be directly credited to the novel's descriptions. The novel made you feel creeped out, disgusted, etc because it was realistic. It makes you feel something in relation to the characters (and no, I don't mean, "But I felt hate for the novel/character because it was written badly."). You may not consider it a masterpiece, but you have to admit it's an impressive book for making you care about the characters enough to make you have an opinion about them.

[Katherine]

To me, this book stands out as a masterpiece is because of the way it made me feel. It confused me so much and made me question my own thoughts and morals, and it made me question the thoughts and the morals of humanity overall. That is what good literature is supposed to do, I think.

[Amy]

I agree with Emily. The way Nabokov makes you feel almost sorry for Humbert is masterful. The prose itself is also beautifully written. Despite the subject matter, I feel this novel is important because it opens your eyes, or at least, in the 1950s, opened the eyes of the middle-classes who believed people like Humbert only existed in lower-class and run-down surroundings.

[Dominique]

I think it is a masterpiece due to the exact purpose of this thread, to spark discussion. Despite how one may feel after reading it, it definitely leaves a person feeling something. People typically read it to its entirety despite feelings of disgust, angst, etc. Personally, I loved the book. I did not read it at first, I listened to an audiobook and I might have thoroughly enjoyed it due to the narrator's great voice acting. He really made the book come to life. I ended up reading the book and many years later watched the movie. Not the original, a later version. Despite my complete disgusted for this perverted man, I often feel sorry for him and at times rooted for him. He was very complex and I longed to understand why made him tick. Why this obsession with this "nymphet?" That fact that I felt this wide range of emotions for Humbert lets me know that it is a literary masterpiece because you become so encumbered in his story that you become attached. Despite everything feeling so wrong, you wanted to know more, how it ends, and sometimes for things to go his way. It's twisted andI loved that a book could make be feel so conflicted.