Lolitas Dickret Is Better Sex
⚡ ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻
Lolitas Dickret Is Better Sex
Page 58 of 73
< Prev
1
←
56
57
58
59
60
→
73
Next >
Page 58 of 73
< Prev
1
←
56
57
58
59
60
→
73
Next >
admin ,
May 4, 2015 , in forum: Porn Pictures And Adult Photos
Replies: 178
Views: 75,954
SimSim ,
Apr 15, 2020 , in forum: Virgins, Castings, Porn Debutantes - Girls +18
Replies: 925
Views: 13,676
SimSim
Today at 9:49 AM
SimSim ,
Jan 25, 2020 , in forum: Virgins, Castings, Porn Debutantes - Girls +18
Replies: 1,181
Views: 17,318
SimSim
25 minutes ago
gorizon ,
Dec 17, 2019 , in forum: Other Perversions
Replies: 743
Views: 7,225
gorizon
Today at 2:17 AM
admin ,
Nov 24, 2019 , in forum: Rules & Important Information
Replies: 0
Views: 2,717
Language
English (US)
Contact Us
Help
Home
Top
RSS
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2016 XenForo Ltd.
Registration is closed! To get the status of Vip And Vip +
Watch “ Lolita (1997)” in the original with subtitles
2D / 3D Adult Comics & Pictures Collection | Page 58 | XXXFiles.Org...
I just finished Lolita . I don’t honestly understand the talk of Humbert...
Lolita - Humbert is a paedophile. He abuses Lolita . Showing 1-50 of 912
Watch Lolita Full Movie Online Free | 123Movies
I just finished Lolita. I don’t honestly understand the talk of Humbert as some sympathetic monster.
I just finished Lolita. I don’t honestly understand the talk of Humbert as some sympathetic monster.
New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast
More posts from the books community
So. I just finished reading Lolita, as the title would imply. I’ve known about it for ages, heard more about it recently, and now I’ve read it.
I don’t know if I misunderstood the feedback I was hearing or what, however...
I would often hear talk about Humbert Humbert as some relatable, likeable monster. Oh yes, the things he was doing were monstrous, but what made the book so fascinating is that Nabokov wrote such an evil character in such a likeable, perhaps even sympathetic fashion!
I really didn’t see this. I found Humbert to be obnoxious, egotistical and generally unlikeable. That’s not even in regards to his relationship with Dolores.
I don’t think there’s a single character he encountered, besides Dolores, who doesn’t cause his internal monologue to sink into some pompous identification and judgement of their character flaws.
The man’s internal monologue, and thus the narrative of the book, seems to alternate between swooning over Dolores, plotting violence or manipulation against those he thinks are going to take her from him (Or her, as she gets older and he fears she is planning to run away, all while he plans to flee the country with her, have children, and thus ‘replacement nymphettes’ as she grows too old. That was probably the most disturbing moment in his internal monologue. His dream of having daughters and granddaughters who would act as his stream of renewable victims as they became too old for his tastes.) and long-winded diatribes about all the reasons he despises these various yokels, idiots, and generally boorish people he meets.
What do people find so compelling or interesting or sympathetic about him? That the narrative has become one of this wonderfully charming, likeable man narrating all these awful things he is doing?
I did not find Humbert likeable in the slightest. I found him to be an incredibly unlikeable, smug egotist. Independent of his taste in women.
The language is lovely. But it left me with no positive feelings for Humbert, whatsoever. In fact, what struck me with this book was the ironic contrast between the beauty of the language and the ugliness of the content of Humbert's inner dialogue.
This is what I've heard people say. Not that the character's likeable, but that you enjoy reading the language and that feels weird because of the content
That and its an exercise in seeing a monster present his side eloquently, not that you agree with it or its well made, but that its so fascinating that this man would tell you about how much of a monster he is and expect you sympathize with him.
Its a look into self-rationalization.
Sums it up very well. Some of the most beautifully crafted prose I have ever read. Character and story repugnant.
That's the point. Nabokov was trying to emphasize the power of words by creating the most beautifully written love story from the point of view of a literal monster.
On another level it really does highlight the effect of a manipulative mastermind gaslighting anyone who reads the book into thinking that he isn't a monster but actually the victim here. You know, the guy that abducted and subsequently statutorily raped a tween he held hostage for multiple weeks while fleeing across the countryside.
The point of the novel isn't that you should feel sympathetic towards pedophiles but that you should be aware of the power of words and their ability to twist and shape the narrative of even one of the most grotesquely immoral acts imaginable.
I haven't read the book in a number of years but isn't the first chapter literally a warning from a criminal psychologist talking about how manipulative Humbert is and that you should be wary when reading his journal?
I'm feeling like a complete idiot while reading through this thread. I'm struggling to read Lolita. It's harder to read than what I'm used to. And yes, English is my first language. sigh
But didn’t you find the beauty of the language seductive? It pulls you in so absolutely that you forget the shocking context. That’s the wonder of it.
I agree with this. I heard somewhere that the book is supposed to be a satire of the culture during Shirley Temple era. So maybe that was on purpose.
That cognitive dissonance between the beautiful language in which the book is written and the loathsome person speaking it is one of the keys to understanding why many people consider Lolita to be one of the best books in the English language.
This was primarily what I took away from it. Nabokov wrote a character who utilized language as a way to frame his own thoughts on the matter in a benign light. I recall one description early in the book was something to the effect of him remembering her struggling against him during an assault, but the language was all diluted and watered down.
I also wanted to like this book because of its cannon on fiction. I barely liked it. I tried. I really did, since I’m a russofile who generally enjoys Russian fiction. But nope. Just read as pedefile too much for my tastes.
Is this what people enjoy about Crime and Punishment? Similar to the original post, this was a book I'd heard great things about, but failed to find anything other than an unlikeable character.
I think your reaction is the reaction most have and os the reaction Nabokov intended. The genius of his writing is that we all finished the book and enjoyed it even though we despised the protagonist.
Nabokov undercuts Humbert through the book, showing him to be a moron despite how brilliant he thinks he is. He doesn't slam it in your face though, at least in the beginning of the book - it's many little hints about his character. It reminds me of Milton's treatment of Satan in Paradise Lost - a 'hero' of the story despite being a piece of work and not so brilliant as he thinks he is.
Young Nude Ero
Amateur Young Pics
Young Hd 720
Hot Young Teacher
Family Nudism Young Photo
630_.jpg" width="550" alt="Lolitas Dickret Is Better Sex" title="Lolitas Dickret Is Better Sex">
