“At that moment I felt that I was losing contact with reality” – To what extent can we believe and trust the narrator of 'Lolita'? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The reality of “Lolita” may differ from Humbert Humbert's fiction, simply because there is no alternative or neutral version of events from which to disprove that conclusion. Lolita has no voice in the novel so it is difficult to judge whether she is a victim or a lover. As a narrator, Humbert has full freedom to select how much or how little actual information is given, perhaps depending on how pleasantly it portrays him. Furthermore, as a murderer, pedophile and asylum-goer, there is undoubtedly a fundamental human principle of not trusting such a person. Mainly because this is someone who is unrealistic, who longs to enter his own world of sexual fantasy, and who becomes creative and intellectually alive when he is in prison, isolated from reality. Through Humbert's prose comes intellect, knowledge of literature, linguistic virtuosity and love of Lolita, which combine to characterize a decidedly atypical villain. He's likeable and funny to the point that, at times, there seems to be very little reason not to believe our narrator. Through the powerful and elaborate text produced while awaiting trial, the possibility that the narrator is unreliable may seem very unlikely or simply poorly disguised. It may also be that evaluating our trust in the narrator results in questioning our trust in Nabokov. Humbert's language can be strange, elaborate, virtuosic and even persuasive at the same time. “Light of my life, fire of my loins” is perhaps the most quoted line from 'Lolita'. Its poetic balance of four syllables on each side of the comma, and "life" is a Humbertian pseudonym for penis, means that both quartets are the same, despite a superficial difference. This phrase encapsulates the constant tensions between perverse lust versus eloquence, reality versus appearance. Similarly, "The tip of the tongue takes a trip of three steps along the palate to tap, on the third, on the teeth" continues the coronal alliteration with 't' instead of 'l' as well as 'f', attracting the focus on an organ used for kissing (lust), as well as speaking (eloquence). Humbert's style has a seductive yet disturbing splendor. As the narrator states, "You can always count on a murderer for an elaborate prose style." Indeed, literary ability is probably not a common characteristic of assassins. Nabokov suggests, “Style, structure, imagery (sic) should never distract the reader from his tepid lust.” Humbert is an obsessive pedophile with a talent for writing. But when a morally questionable topic like pedophilia is mediated through dazzling verbal pyrotechnics, Humbert can seem trustworthy and credible. Humbert's narration continues to destabilize the reader. The explanation for Humbert's love for girls is that his childhood sweetheart died before they could have sexual intercourse. By intertextually alluding to Poe's poem "Annabel Lee", it is as if Humbert is only augmenting ideas already present in the literature. Elsewhere, he refers to Danté's nine-year-old Beatrice and Petrarch's twelve-year-old “nymphet” Laureen. By associating pedophilia with the writers underlying Western culture, perhaps it should raise doubts about our “humble” ideas of morality and normality, as well as show how ethical systems are simply context-dependent. There is a further estrangement and agreater poetic imagination in describing one's thoughts: "I think of the aurochs and the angels, the secret of lasting pigments, the prophetic sonnets, the refuge of art." As in the case of Poe or Dante, heaven, prophecy and art are not usually associated with pedophiles. The overall effect, however, is a series of rather anxious justifications on Humbert's part, attempting in vain to romanticize and defamiliarize pedophilia. Humbert's references to literature persist, with particular regard to French. “Nous connûmes, to use a Flaubertian interpretation…Nous connûmes (this is real fun).” Throughout the novel there are references to Flaubert and Proust, the latter famous for 'A la récherche du temps perdu', a story of love and art. It may be that, in referring to Flaubert, Humbert is simply trying to further reinforce a veneer of romanticism surrounding his pedophilia. Like his protagonist, Nabokov was an expert on French literature and an émigré writer living in America. Other works are autobiographical such as 'Look at the Harlequins!' (1974) and "Pnin" (1957) which reflects Navokov's life in a similar way to "Lolita". Significantly, Pnin is a stupid and ridiculous figure who fails to adapt to Western culture, unlike the intellectual and eloquent image of Vladimir Nabokov, conveyed through Humbert Humbert. So not only do the quotations from French writing create a romantically academic guise of Humbert, but they give substance to an autobiographical reading where the author has created a veneer to mislead the reader. Although 'Lolita' can be interpreted autobiographically, Nabokov states: "It is childish to study a work of fiction to gain information about... the author." It can therefore be disputed that autobiographical readings cannot be definitive, or help us determine Humbert's credibility. The narrator's use of the French language can also be misleading. In addition to the presence of much of the French phraseology used in English, such as “chéri”¸ Humbert includes many uncommon ones, “Eh bien, pas du tout!” and “that mot!” between them. And when it comes to love, his "romantic soul becomes all sweaty and trembling at the thought of encountering some unpleasant, indecent and terrible… 'Mais allez-y, allez-y!' First, the unpleasantness is about sexual etiquette and completely ignores the much more important moral unpleasantness, conjuring up an unpleasant image of our narrator. Secondly, this is further evidence that Nabokov defamiliarizes the pedophile, through anomalous associations: the clichéd connotations of romance through French should paint a passionate rather than perverse picture of Humbert, particularly as he instinctively slips into the language when is in the process of describing his passionate struggle. Furthermore, Humbert is critical of Charlotte using "that horrible French"; meanwhile Lolita asks, "Do you really mind eliminating the Frenchman?" The irony of Humbert's hypocrisy presents a person who is incapable of self-criticism and face reality, and who therefore cannot be fully trusted. Misogyny is probably hidden behind the veneers. Humbert sees Lolita-girls as objects of sexual desire, and is therefore not the kind of paternal, benevolent narrator he might seem on the surface. “Lo-lee-ta.” The breaking of the word here mimics the way Humbert broke/destroyed his stepdaughter. Elsewhere he refers to her as "found", "child slave" and "wagging her tail, all her bottom in fact like little bitches do". Suggestions of a non-reciprocal, non-loving relationship form a structure that begins with “love” – “light of my life” – and ends with realization – “what have I done with your life?” The trust ofreader gradually decreases. The prototype of Lolita, Annabel, has “honey-colored skin” because for Humbert she is an object, something sweet that he can consume. Her, “'thin arms,' 'large, bright mouth,' 'long eyelashes,' 'bobbed brown hair,'” show Humbert as a lover of the youthful female physique; a feminist critic would argue that he sees women, particularly “nymphets,” as nothing more than servants of his libido and, worse still, blames his crimes on Annabel, and therefore on women. Likewise, he describes Lolita “standing on the pedals to operate them vigorously” and “plunging her hand into the lower anatomy of a table lamp.” By characterizing nonsexual activities in a sexual light, Humbert seems unable to escape his narrow-minded pedophilic, often misogynistic obsessions. There is also a phallic image: “…mountains; bluish beauties never reachable… sky piercing snow-veined gray stone colossi,” and even in the crime scene, “I pulled out my automatic…” Furthermore, this plethora of sexual connotations that transpire unconsciously through language reveals Humbert's true misogynist intentions; the trust between reader and narrator is rapidly crumbling. Virginia Woolf once said, “The sound of his voice was dearer to him than the voice of humanity in his anguish.” on Joseph Conrad, is equally applicable to Humbert, and probably to Nabokov.) Imaginative prose and sexual innuendos are appreciated more by Humbert than by Lolita's well-being. It is morally corrupt and the reader should not believe the poetic veneers applied for In complete contrast, Humbert can be seen as a pawn in the game of Lolita's sexual desires, thus a victim of female manipulation; He admits: "(I) forget all my male pride - and literally crawl on my knees towards your chair, my Lolita!" And so perhaps the pedophile is as innocent as he believes; Lolita is maliciously playing mind games with an easy target, driving him crazy: “I don't think I can go on…” Furthermore, the narrative is devoid of strong language that would suggest that rape has been committed, for example, “I gave she to hold the scepter of my passion in her clumsy fist should not be considered completely innocent, indeed she had a voluntary sexual experience at Camp Q; Freud claimed that children are actually “polymorphically perverse”. getting on the pedals to operate them vigorously" is not Humbert's sexual narrowness, but Lolita's flirtatious provocation; she is his lover. Therefore Humbert's story can be interpreted as realistic. Much less realistic is Humbert's attempt to justify the his pedophilia with a kind of artistic philosophy. He states: "With passion, I hoped to find the portrait of the artist as a young brute preserved." This allusion to James Joyce supports the idea that Humbert feels the need to transform his actions and the his life in a work of art. He is said to have found 'Ulysses' obscene, and for this reason he abstains from pornographic explicitness. Humbert tries to present himself as nothing more than an admirer of the female form and youthful beauty, that is, simply an unconventional aesthetic. His intentions are not erotic or sexual, but aesthetic. So he's probably a character we can trust, and just a misogynistic child molester by circumstance. According to Humbert, “Sex is nothing but the handmaiden of art.” With these issues in mind, the narrative may not be a reliable reflection of reality, especially without an alternative account. Humbert can be seen as out of touch with reality, obsessive and moody. Little by littleas the novel progresses, it seems that Humbert's collapse and the coherence of his narrative, which can only be realized by analyzing a longer passage, also happens: (with Lo in a warm, happy, wild, intense, hopeful whisper, without hope – 'Look, the McCrystals, please, let's talk to them please?' – let's talk to them, reader – 'please! I'll do anything you want, oh please...'). ”Indian ceremonial dances, strictly commercial. ART: American Refrigerator Transit Company. The obvious Arizona, the pueblo dwellings, the aboriginal pictographs, a dinosaur track in a desert canyon, printed there thirty-nine million years ago, when I was a child. A gangly boy, six feet tall, pale, with a active Adam's apple, looking at Lo and her bare orange-brown belly, which I kissed five minutes later, Jack. ; his "confused vision" is shared by the reader. It's unlikely, but it could be Nabokov parodying such psychological ideas of mind breakdown and consciousness, especially with "ART" being nothing more than a refrigerator company. Indeed, there are other moments of wit such as when Miss Cormorant calls him by six different names – variations of Humbert – in a meeting, and the school Lolita attends is jokingly called St. Algebra. Furthermore, the aforementioned 'Pnin' is a parody of a Russian academic's struggle to adapt to American culture, making gaffes such as: "When you're in the glass houses, don't kill two birds with one stone." But the parody is probably a misinterpretation, as Humbert admits: “I felt I was simply losing touch with reality.” And "psychoanalyzing this poem, I noticed that it is really a maniac's masterpiece," he says of 'Wanted, Wanted: Dolores Haze.' Also, in a couple of chapters three years pass, so the narrator is clearly out of touch with time. He also confesses: “I don't think I can go on. Heart, head: everything. Lolita…” repeating her name eight times. Overall, there is a sense that Humbert is disconnected from the real world. The distrust of Humbert may simply stem from the fact that he is a criminal and sometimes represents something of a madman. It is difficult to believe in the innocence of a man who is a murderer, pedophile and asylum-goer, and who writes the 'Confession of a White Widower'. The paranoia of losing Lolita plagues Humbert. "I know all the names of your group... I have the complete list of students with me... I also have Beardsley's list with me." One gets the impression of an obsessive-compulsive madman, but perhaps this neuroticism is justified by the revelation that Quilty stalked and then took Lolita. Humbert's guilt is made clear by the fact that he "died in lawful confinement" and uses courtroom language such as "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury" and "exhibit number one...". However, this confessional style is completely overwhelmed by the imagination of his prose. Intertextually recalls Alex's confessional style in A Clockwork Orange, which is similarly overwhelmed by Nadsat's language. In prison, Humbert is free; the constraints of realism, temptation and addiction have been removed. There are echoes here of Paul Pennyfeather escaping reality in "Decline and Fall" and of Maupassant's Walter Schnaffs wishing he were in prison to escape the reality of war. Humbert's creativity flourishes while in prison because, separated from reality, he feels at home. Since the narrator has been cut off from the real world, his narration is probably equally unrealistic. But, arguably, Humbert's inability to deal with the situation while in the real world encourages the reader's sympathy. Humbert seems to be a victim of the temptations of the real world. Analyzing his language, he is quite aware of the sins he commits. The reason.