Essay Obsession in Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita

Vladimir Nabokov’s novel Lolita and Bret Easton Ellis’s novel American Psycho both show the stories of seemingly regular men based off of how they interact with people in their lives while in public view. The main characters from each novel are not normal functioning men of society. Humbert Humbert from Nabokov’s Lolita is a middle aged man who has an obsession with young girls around the age of twelve. Patrick Bateman from Ellis’s American Psycho is an incredibly narcissistic, egotistic, man who is an investment banker by day and serial killer by night. Both men have had a privileged upbringing.

Furthermore, as Lolita can be considered an open text and this paper is concerned with bringing female perspectives to the forefront of the novel, it is reasonable to apply traditional feminist theory to the text to examine Humbert’s marginalisation of women. In particular, this reading will be formulated through applying the work of second-wave feminist Kate Millett, which focuses on exposing the reprehensibility of patriarchal oppression. To begin, Nabokov consistently constructs Humbert to display misogynistic views. To illustrate this, in the scene where Humbert recalls his sexual excitement when Dolores laid across his lap, he fantasizes about being ‘a radiant and robust Turk…enjoying the youngest and frailest of his slaves.’ Due to the reader’s knowledge of Humbert’s affinity for ‘nymphets,’ whom he defines as girls between the age of nine and fourteen, it can be deduced that these ‘slaves’ are female. The word ‘frail’ holds connotations of debility, fragility and vulnerability. Through these negative associations, Nabokov has positioned readers to understand that Humbert views women as inferior to men. This holds relevance to Millett’s theory of female inferiority, through which she explains that ‘the female’s inferior status’ is ‘ascribed to her physical weakness or intellectual inferiority.’ Millett published her work in 1969 during the second wave feminist movement, whereby women demanded equality and challenged patriarchal ideologies regarding sexuality,

In Vladimir Nabokov’s novel “Lolita”, the titular secondary character, is used to satisfy Humbert Humbert’s (also known as H.H.) nymphet fantasies. Dolores Haze, or Lolita as H.H. calls her, is immediately stripped of her innocence. Lolita is not responsible for her experience because her being and actions are turned into perversions by H.H, and the relationship between H.H. and Lolita are skewed and ultimately normalized; however, she is responsible when she runs away from H.H., gaining control of her life once more. These pivotal events unfold before Lolita and directly affect her experience as a child and young adolescent. It was through chance that Humbert Humbert met Lolita.

Charlotte maintains this pure appearance because, outside of allowing herself to be seduced by Montraville, she has lived a pure life. While Charlotte attempts to remain virtuous according to her upbringing, the moment that she allows herself to make a single transgression, she quickly spirals into making further transgressions that build on one another. For example, when Montraville slips Charlotte a love letter, she is determined not to respond to it, but then she caves to meeting him once again. Attempting to maintain her morality, she convinces herself that the meeting is just to “inform him of the impropriety of [their] continuing to see or correspond with each other” (37). However, this determination to remain moral ends up faltering, and after their first meeting,

The complete transformation continues after she is abandoned, and as “once an object of desire”, Charlotte’s “emaciated appearance” enables her from being valuable in any way, as the main purpose for her capture, pleasure, is unable to be satisfied (76). The connection between Charlotte’s corporeal appearance to the society's culture and ideology, solidify the depletion of her worth throughout her stay in America. She is seen as an “object” of “desire” and with no appeal left, she is of no use to the men in the novel. Rowson’s final depiction of Charlotte’s loss of self reflects in her pregnancy and how the unborn child becomes an “innocent witness” and physical image of her worth and “heir to […] shame” (62). The body is bought for nothing and so is worth nothing to be respected and acknowledged. Charlotte is detached from humanity at the hands of others and is merely an object to be used when one

This results in the narrative perspective of the novel demonstrating how Humbert attempts to conceal his true nature through, in his own mind, clever ‘adjustments’ to how the story is presented and references to historical figures who shared the same desires as him- ‘Oh Lolita, you are my girl, as Vee was Poe’s and Bea Dante’s’ (Nabokov 1955), yet often reverts to a disposition in which he laments about his monstrous desires. Not only this, but the comparison to famous literary greats suggests that Humbert considers himself to be of their status and thus possesses an idolized version of himself, a self which can easily transform language into ploys to conceal his true nature.

Finally, it is suggested that Humbert views Lolita through the lens of the figure of the idealized young woman as presented in the Western literary tradition. For example, Sarah Herbold writes that “At times, Lolita seems to be no more than a device composed of many literary virgin/whores”, while Linda Kauffman suggests that Lolita is “Humbert’s creation, a mirage engendered by Humbert's obsessions and his reading list”. Not surprisingly, critics have tended to condemn what they see as Humbert’s replacement of the ‘real’ Lolita with an imagined, artistic image of her. Thus, far from seeing Humbert’s role as artist as exculpating him, critics have in fact tended to view it as an integral aspect of his wrongdoing in the novel. Furthermore, it

Lolita was an interesting novel, but not for its sexual themes and scenes that most people would be interested in it for. The best part of this novel is how enchantingly yet disgusting it can be. Through the dialogue, the story was able to manipulate the reader to sympathize with a morally-corrupt pedophile. The reader could tell that Humbert was being duped, and when what Lolita had been hiding was revealed, one could understand how Humbert could feel duped. It’s not just that however, Humbert’s character reveals a lot about the complexity a person could have. He is shown to be charming, witty, cultured, and has many positive qualities that in no way excuse his behavior. When reading a book, the person reading often emphasizes with the protagonist

In the book Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov, to psychoanalyze the main character, Humbert Humbert, would take far too long. His craving for the “nymphets” stems from the loss of his very own childhood love, Annabel. At the age of 12, he fell in love with Annabel. However, before the two young children were ever able to become intimate, Annabel died. Humbert alleges that their failure to consummate their relationship is what impelled Humbert to subconsciously have these sexual wants for nymphets. In psychoanalysis, Freud explains that issues that develop during the time of adulthood are stemmed from instances that occurred during childhood. The inability to have sex with Annabel has become a subconscious turmoil for Humbert and as an adult, he is subconsciously trying to fulfill that void. Conferring

Charlotte was having a secret affair with the narrator while she was engaged to Maurice. Charlotte is obviously not the most faithful or loyal human being, but the narrator seems to have an amazing relationship with her and is blind by her love to Charlotte. However, once Maurice returns from Thailand, and the two go to Charlotte’s room to talk, “someone else was putting his fingers through her curls” (Smith 266). The irony is surreal at this point of the story (but not surprising as I will explain in the next paragraph), because the narrator believed she had Charlotte all to herself while she was supposed to be loyal to Maurice. All throughout the affair, Charlotte was having another affair with a third man and had no remorse for either of them.

Lolita, the novel by Vladimir Nabokov, tells the story of Humbert Humbert, who is a perfect example of a pedophile. Although the character Humbert Humbert describes his feelings toward the twelve year old Lolita as love, in actuality, it is obsessive lust. Nabokov does an excellent job displaying the characteristics of pedophilia through this character. Reading Lolita makes us conscious of the need to be more aware that pedophilia is alive and well in our society today. In developing this point, I will examine pedophilia and its clinical characteristics as they relate to Humbert Humbert and our society.

    In Chapter 31 of Part 1 of Lolita, Humbert and Lolita are in the lobby of the Enchanted Hunters only hours after consummating their sexual relationship. As Humbert arrives in the lobby to check out of the hotel, he observes Lolita as she sits reading a movie magazine in a large armchair, and his description of her progresses from a focus on her loss of innocence to a focus on her inner, demonic nature. As elsewhere in the novel, the reader here sees Humbert attempting to mitigate his own sense of guilt and self-loathing.

Obsession is defined as “the domination of one’s thoughts or feelings by a persistent idea or desire.” The desire for nonconformity is a praiseworthy attribute but when taken too far, it can be disadvantageous to one’s goals and ambitions. While it is essential for one to seek transient passions, it is also crucial to mollify this pursuit, with concern with actual use. The threats of overindulgence are notably apparent in the case of John, the protagonist of Virginia Woolf’s “Solid Objects”, whose passion for knickknacks turns into a subtle obsession. Woolf expresses her strong criticism of John by intensifying his wasted potentiality and his fixation with fleeting dreams while she commends Charles for his dependability and practicality.

Another striking resemblance to William’s description of the ‘common’ form of obsession stems from the fact that when Humbert meets Annabel, his father is away touring Italy. He states that he “had nobody to complain to, nobody to consult” about sex (11). Instead of speaking to a parental figure about his sexual desire, he tries to figure it out for himself and in the process projects what he is really missing, a loving parental figure, onto this adolescent girl.

From the first, he juxtaposes the ordinary with the sexual in his descriptive odes to love as well as simple statement reflecting her youth. The juxtaposition of youth and sexual desire is the driving force behind the novel and the controversy. The wording, however, is a mixture of romantic lyricism and obscene allusion. The tension is derived through the sensuous beauty of the words rather than the image of the young girl, just “four feet ten”. “The tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps” refers to Humbert’s tongue and the palate he wishes to “tap at three on the teeth” is Lolita’s. Evidently, Humbert’s clever choice of words masks the interdict aspect of his sexual desires for Lolita. Poetic lines such as “light of my life, fire of my loins” become fundamental in understanding the contextual allusion from immorality in Humbert’s deviant sexual desires and behavior.