Deception in Vladimir Nabokov's 'Lolita'

Alexander Dolinin Addresses Reader Manipulation in 'Lolita'

Dec 26, 2009 Sarah Mathiesen

Readers of Vladimir Nabokov's 'Lolita' are coaxed into empathising with a known pedophile; Slavic Literature expert, Professor Alexander Dolinin reveals how.

Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita has been marred with infamy since its initial publication in 1955 due to the novel's controversial subject matter – middle-aged Humbert Humbert's sexual obsession with his 12-year-old stepdaughter Dolores (Lolita) Haze.

Nabokov's style cleverly guides readers into empathising with, and perhaps even understanding, Humbert's lust for his nymphet by employing various levels of deception throughout the work. According to Alexander Dolinin, Professor of Slavic Languages and Literature, University of Wisconsin, there are three interconnected levels of deception and reader manipulation in Lolita:

  1. Humbert Humbert as a character within the stated time-frame of Lolita's plot (1957 to 1952)
  2. Humbert Humbert as the author of his memoir after his own alleged death and;
  3. The God-like authors impersonated as John Ray, Jnr and Vivian Darkbloom.

"Newspaper references and quotes belong to the second and third levels," says Prof Dolinin. "As do similar allusions to contemporary movies, songs and AAA guide-books."

The presence of these levels, references to 'true crimes' (such as the Sally Horner case) and intertextual allusions suggest that readers of Lolita should not accept the novel's tale as a reliable re-telling of the events that took place in the lives of Humbert Humbert and Dolores Haze. Instead, readers should recognise that the account given by Humbert in Lolita is just one side of the story.

In 1959, novelist Robertson Davies failed to challenge Humbert's account and proposed that the theme of Lolita is "not the corruption of an innocent child by a cunning adult, but the exploitation of a weak adult by a corrupt child".

However, it is clear that Davies did not take into account the layers that Nabokov employed to produce a reading so heavily in favour of Humbert.

Deception by Humbert Humbert in Lolita

As Professor Dolinin states, Humbert Humbert as a first person author provides an unreliable narrative of the relationship between himself and Dolores Haze. Humbert is perhaps too close to the action and reads Lolita's actions as his own fantasies wish them to be. Therefore, it is difficult for the reader to ever truly know whether Lolita seduced Humbert that first night at the Enchanted Hunter inn, or if Humbert took advantage of a little girl's innocent affection towards a fatherly figure.

Deception by Humbert Humbert as the Author of his Memoir

Throughout his memoir, Humbert regularly reminds the reader that he is writing 'under observation' and thus, one may assume that the narrator omits certain truths and toys with others. Indeed, in the final chapter Humbert discloses:

"At this or that twist of [my story] I feel my slippery self eluding me, gliding into deeper and darker waters than I care to probe. I have camouflaged what I could so as not to hurt people. And I have toyed with many pseudonyms for myself before I hit on a particularly apt one."

The reader is also conscious that Humbert was permitted access to old newspapers and AAA guides while writing his memoir. Indeed, Humbert makes several references to the Sally Horner case, which made headlines in 1950. In his research into this case, Prof Dolinin points out that during one such reference " Humbert is talking to Lolita in 1947, that is a year before the real abduction when Sally Horner was nine or ten years old".

The reader may therefore deduce that certain pieces of contemporary culture and intertextual reference have been weaved into the 'true' story of Humbert and Lolita, thus interfering with the account.

John Ray Jr and Vivian Darkbloom Attempt to Fill the Gaps

The final layer of deception, though more than likely unintentional, is that of the fictional God-like author, John Ray, Jr, who supposedly edited Humbert Humbert's manuscript.

"I think that it is Humbert Humbert who gives a false interpretation of the story while the implied author gives the reader a number of important clues to build up a better interpretation," says Prof Dolinin.

However, as the recipient of a completed manuscript following the writer's death, John Ray, Jnr can only hope to fill the gaps correctly and will never know if the assumptions he makes, and subsequently passes to the reader, are correct.

In addition, the reader is again made aware that certain changes had been made to the original tale. In his foreword, John Ray, Jnr discloses that "Save for the correction of obvious solecisms and a careful suppression of a few tenacious details that despite 'H.H.' 's own efforts still subsisted in his text... this remarkable memoir is presented intact."

Vivian Darkbloom (an anagram for Vladimir Nabokov) appears to provide a similar service as biographer for Clare Quilty, a character with similar likings to Humbert.

It is clear that readers of Lolita are gently lulled into accepting Humbert Humbert's story and his passion for young Dolores Haze. Nabokov has created a web of manipulation from levels of deceipt and a poetic use of the English language, that draws readers in like flies.

Perhaps John Ray, Jnr put it best when he wrote "how magically [Humbert's] singing violin can conjure up a tenderesse, a compassion for Lolita that makes us entranced with the book while abhorring its author!".

The copyright of the article Deception in Vladimir Nabokov's 'Lolita' in World Literatures is owned by Sarah Mathiesen. Permission to republish Deception in Vladimir Nabokov's 'Lolita' in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
Lolita, Vladimir Nabokov, Cellardoore Lolita, Vladimir Nabokov
   
What do you think about this article?

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
post your comment
What is 1+9?

Comments

Jan 2, 2010 5:05 PM
Guest :
When reading such literary analysis, I am often reminded of comments made by Samuel Clemens to the effect that he writes a story and the critics report on one completely different.

In other words, while some may find hidden intrigues, secret subtext, and masked meanings in Nabokov's classic work, Lolita is likely nothing more than a wonderfully rendered, rather human, story -- a study of the base feelings that a majority of men encounter at one time or another in their lives, moral certitude notwithstanding.

Much ado about nothing.

.
Jan 2, 2010 5:28 PM
Sarah Mathiesen :
Guest,
I agree whole-heartedly that Lolita is a beautifully crafted tale that casts a blinding light on the morals society thrusts upon all of us. It is very likely that Nabokov wrote the novel merely for writing's sake. Indeed, in his afterword, Nabokov wrote;
"Teachers of Literature are apt to think up such problems as 'What is the author's purpose?' or still worse 'What is the guy trying to say?' Now, I happen to be the kind of author who in starting to work on a book has no other purpose to get rid of that book and who, when asked to explain its origin and growth, has to rely on ancient terms as Interaction of Inspiration and Combination..."
However, this article does not intend to discover some secret subtext hidden in the depths of 'Lolita', but to draw explanation of how Nabokov managed to make the world fall in love with a known peadophile. It explores the techniques Nabokov employed to create reader empathy with Humbert and the two-sided illusion of narrator reliability/unreliability. Nothing more.
Jan 2, 2010 10:10 PM
Guest :
Ms. Mathiesen:

I understand the premise of your article. Let me endeavor to be more clear and less hasty with words: It is your synopsis of the article, in which you state "...the techniques Nabokov employed to create reader empathy with Humbert and the two-sided illusion of narrator reliability/unreliability.", that I have difficulty with.

You write: "techniques... employed to create...", where, in my humble opinion, Nabokov crafted a story simply using an innovative yet not-unknown literary device.

Granted, the story is built upon a sensitive, socially repugnant, subject matter, but I suggest that it is the very nature of that theme which perhaps prompts an over-intellectualized retrospective, whereas, were we to replace the subject with something more mundane -- say a murder mystery -- using the same device, we would have little to whinny about here, Nabokov's exceptional talent notwithstanding.

That said, it is the nature of great art to inspire beyond its original form and it is under the spell of such works we happily fall and thus energetically attend to. Would that all such 'sins' be the norm.

Your thesis inspires thought, indeed.

.
Jan 3, 2010 7:36 AM
Guest :
Ms. Mathiesen:

I understand the premise of your article. Let me endeavor to be more clear and less hasty with words: It is your synopsis of the article, in which you state "...the techniques Nabokov employed to create reader empathy with Humbert and the two-sided illusion of narrator reliability/unreliability.", that I have difficulty with.

You write: "techniques... employed to create...", where, in my humble opinion, Nabokov crafted a story simply using an innovative yet not-unknown literary device.

Granted, the story is built upon a sensitive, socially repugnant, subject matter, but I suggest that it is the very nature of that theme which perhaps prompts an over-intellectualized retrospective, whereas, were we to replace the subject with something more mundane -- say a murder mystery -- using the same device, we would have little to whinny about here, Nabokov's exceptional talent notwithstanding.

That said, it is the nature of great art to inspire beyond its original form and it is under the spell of such works we happily fall and thus energetically attend to. Would that all such 'sins' be the norm.

Your thesis inspires thought, indeed.

.
4 Comments
;