To Brian Boyd:

Your post speaks to a lot of what I feel.  The bad of my having been treated like someone's "little Lolita" in late childhood in the 1950s (no small thing by far) is a completely different realm from the good of reading the book Lolita for reasons like what you describe, Brian, to the point that I've rarely explicitly connected the two realms, but did experience the lifelong pleasures of musing about uncanny magic in literature (never so much a scholar of that as you and others who post here, but not knowing as much still has had its pleasures because of the greatness of that book as a good wonderful thing that did not harm me but only brought me good and riches).  Nothing spoiled my ability to be enriched and fascinated forever by Lolita, and if anything, the bad I experienced was given some relief by that book and the likes of that book, beautiful, hilarious, and wrenching. The area of life to more fully address for me the seriously bad I experienced is a different kind. And yet another area, as an educator I found what Anne Dwyer wrote interesting and somewhat useful, at least in bringing up the pedagogical topic and initiating discussion of it. As a reader, educator, as a person generally in life not even solely regarding engaging with literature, but overall, I found what you wrote more edifying. I haven't had a chance to read the Williams paper you attached, but I shall. 

Barrie Karp

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:31 AM, Brian Boyd <b.boyd@auckland.ac.nz> wrote:

From Brian Boyd:


I must confess I turned to Anne Dwyer’s article enthusiastically (even before Eric's post), because I find it harder and harder to teach Lolita to my students, but I was disappointed.

 

Part of the problem of teaching Lolita, isn’t it, is that many student readers nowadays fixate on Humbert’s perversion and evil to the exclusion of all else in the novel, as if the fact that Hermann Karlovich was a murderer made everything else in Despair irrelevant or immaterial or uninteresting; yet Lolita is so many dimensions ampler than Despair.

 

But if we do stick to Humbert’s predilections and behavior, and think in terms of the harm the book could cause, being about those predilections and that behavior from the inside, one of the strongest claims on behalf of Lolita, surely, is that sex abuse therapists find it so valuable, so insightful, so genuinely therapeutic, such a clear way of showing the psychology of an abuser. See the attached article by Lucia Willians, and note her references to the work of Sokhna Fall.

 

Another way of looking at Lolita is in terms of content. It deals with things that we value so much, including desire and love and beauty, in ways that are outrageous. But it is the cost of having capacities for desire and love and an appetite for beauty that they can go wrong, and that’s what makes their not going wrong so precious, and why we should be attuned to false claims to these positives.

 

Another way of looking at the Lolita problem is in terms of the challenge to readers, the benefit for readers. One of the most important things in human life is freedom, including freedom from manipulation, from unfair and false persuasion and pressure, and from oppression. Humbert tries to manipulate and pressure us as he has manipulated Lolita. We need to learn to resist. Lolita is the supreme exercise in literature of the challenge of reading against the character narrating. That’s partly a technical challenge for the author, and a “technical” and moral challenge for readers. Why would we want a fugitive and cloistered virtue?

​ 



From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU> on behalf of Eric NAIMAN <naiman@BERKELEY.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, 16 May 2018 8:12 a.m.
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject: [NABOKV-L] Anne Dwyer on "Why I teach Lolita"
 
For those of us who teach or admire Lolita, Anne Dwyer (Pomona College) has published an eloquent defense of the novel.


Google Search
the archive
Contact
the Editors
NOJ
___

Zembla
Nabokov Studies (Journal)
Policies
___
Options
Chercheurs Enchantés (French VN Society)
AdaOnline
___
Dieter Zimmer's Site
NSJ Ada Annotations L-Soft Search the archive VN Bibliography Blog

All private editorial communications are read by both co-editors.


nab-l banner

Google Search
the archive
Contact
the Editors
NOJ
___

Zembla
Nabokov Studies (Journal)
Policies
___
Options
Chercheurs Enchantés (French VN Society)
AdaOnline
___
Dieter Zimmer's Site
NSJ Ada Annotations L-Soft Search the archive VN Bibliography Blog

All private editorial communications are read by both co-editors.