Nabokov - a fucking retard? - /lit/ (#24551881) [Archived: 245 hours ago]

Anonymous
7/15/2025, 3:57:22 PM No.24551881
IMG_1326
IMG_1326
md5: f165d8923d908d1c4b1700e86ea85851🔍
>Dude the deeper meaning is irrelevant
>This obvious allegory crafted by the author? Disregard it, it’s words on a page, it doesn’t mean anything. The author actually doesn’t care about what his work wants to say.
I want to revive this faggot just to kill him.
Replies: >>24552625 >>24552758 >>24553126 >>24553523 >>24554692 >>24555301
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 7:42:47 PM No.24552572
Great question. Saying Lolita is a mirror means that the novel isn’t just about Humbert Humbert — it’s about you, the reader. More specifically, it’s about:


---

1. How Easily People Are Seduced by Language

Humbert is a monster — a manipulative, self-justifying pedophile — but he’s also:

Highly articulate

Witty

Poetic

Self-aware


Many readers (especially new or uncritical ones) find themselves sympathizing with him, or at least being drawn into his version of events. That’s not an accident — that’s the trap Nabokov set on purpose.

> He’s asking: “How much can beautiful prose blind you to moral horror?”
So when people say Lolita is a mirror, they mean:
It reflects how willing you are to rationalize evil when it's dressed up nicely.


---

2. It Reflects Cultural Complicity

Lolita also critiques:

Romanticism of youth and “innocence”

The commodification of girls in media

The idea of “mature for her age” as a social excuse


The culture around Humbert — hotels, schools, bystanders — lets him get away with it, and so does the reader unless they actively resist the narrative.

If you find yourself thinking:

> “Well, she seemed to like him...”
That’s the mirror working.


---

3. It Reveals Reader Projection

Lolita isn’t really about Lolita. We never hear her voice, only Humbert’s version of her.
This leads readers to project their own biases and fantasies onto her — and Nabokov deliberately withholds her real perspective to make you aware of that.

So the question becomes:

> "Who is Lolita in your mind, and why do you see her that way?"
That’s the mirror again — it shows you what you bring to the story.


---

Nabokov’s Warning:

Nabokov didn’t write Lolita to shock for shock’s sake. He wrote it to:

Show how language can disguise violence,

Expose the reader’s complicity,

And hold up a mirror to a culture that romanticizes predators and silences victims.


So if you come out of Lolita thinking, “this book is just about a pervert and a brat,” you might have looked in the mirror — and blinked.


---

Want a version of this as a short, ironic /lit/ post reply?
Replies: >>24552595 >>24552611 >>24553517 >>24553521 >>24554721
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 7:49:52 PM No.24552595
>>24552572
>Want a version of this as a short, ironic /lit/ post reply?
Yes please, thank you. But edit it so there are no emdashes: the posters on /lit/ are getting too uppity about that sort of thing.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 7:53:21 PM No.24552611
>>24552572
Soulless literary analysis bot
Replies: >>24552654
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 7:55:23 PM No.24552625
>>24551881 (OP)
He's right. Expecting actual sociological truths from a work of fiction is retarded.
>I built this fake world that proves my point, now discuss why I'm right.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 8:01:30 PM No.24552654
>>24552611
Which parts do you disagree with?
Replies: >>24552800
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 8:24:41 PM No.24552758
>>24551881 (OP)
Nabokov should have been a musician but was misled by his synesthesia. I wish Taboritsky had acted a few years earlier so modern literature wouldn't have suffered this confusion and derailing.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 8:29:38 PM No.24552786
>24552572
i hope the good for nothing jannies ban users who post ai generated text. they can be reported for bot behavior right?
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 8:33:23 PM No.24552800
>>24552654
oh I didn't know you were alive ..
Replies: >>24552838
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 8:43:59 PM No.24552838
>>24552800
People deflect or respond with vague generalizations and insults when asked a question for several possible reasons:

1. They don’t know the answer.

Instead of admitting ignorance, they dodge to protect their ego or avoid embarrassment.

2. They feel threatened.

A question might make someone feel cornered or vulnerable—especially if it challenges their beliefs, intelligence, or integrity—so they respond defensively.

3. They want to avoid accountability.

Dodging a direct answer can be a tactic to escape responsibility, especially in arguments, politics, or when they've been caught in a contradiction.

4. They’re trying to control the conversation.

By shifting focus, insulting, or generalizing, they try to redirect the topic or destabilize the questioner’s stance.

5. They’re emotionally reacting.

Some people lash out when emotionally triggered—especially with insults—because they’re frustrated or angry and don’t have better tools to communicate.

6. They rely on rhetorical strategy.

In debates or trolling, vague and insulting replies can be used to provoke, stall, or undermine rather than contribute meaningfully.

If someone consistently does this, they’re usually not arguing in good faith. You can either disengage or call it out directly—calmly asking them to clarify or answer directly often exposes their evasiveness.
Replies: >>24553521 >>24554404
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:27:13 PM No.24553126
>>24551881 (OP)
The author might care about saying something but it's not why the work is good, and not what's interesting to analyze about it.
Go back to your Great Courses on Great Ideas, little pseud. You have growing to do before you can appreciate aestheticism.
Replies: >>24553138
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:34:18 PM No.24553138
>>24553126
The fraud considered Kafka one of his favorite writers yet relied on translations.
Replies: >>24553158
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 10:46:19 PM No.24553158
>>24553138
Then I'm sure you can tell me what's wrong with his lectures on Kafka?
For some reason German-speaking critics appreciate them a lot.
Replies: >>24553196
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 11:04:29 PM No.24553194
You misunderstand Nabokov. For him the thought is just an element of style. Allegory and philosophy in literature aren’t worthless, but they’re only worth their weight in beauty (i.e. how it coheres with the rest of the work) and is therefore secondary. Stories and poems should be seen as only having aesthetic content, and no ethical or didactic content.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 11:05:27 PM No.24553196
>>24553158
I disagree with the fact that Gregory’s transformation should be seen as literary magic as opposed to an allegory for life and the human condition.
But that’s besides the point.
If you value the literal words on the page above all to the extent that Nabokov does, reading a translation is beyond laughable, unless you seek to ”critique” the translated work and not the original.
Replies: >>24553224
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 11:19:53 PM No.24553224
>>24553196
>Gregory’s transformation should be seen as literary magic as opposed to an allegory for life and the human condition
saying it's an allegory adds just about nothing to the story. Taking a shit and flushing it down is an allegory for life and the human condition, if you want it to be.
Not taking up the story on what it actually tells, that is Gregor "magically" turning into a bug, is reducing it to a banality. Still, Nabokov talks at length about the human condition part, and the treatment of a suddenly useless Gregor by his family, in the lectures.
>reading a translation is beyond laughable
You're aware that he was teaching at an English-speaking college with mostly monolingual students, right? He himself probably knew enough German to read Kafka.
Replies: >>24553246
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 11:25:00 PM No.24553237
Forg of honesty
Forg of honesty
md5: 9de92ff645e06994b5a04f1ab252be11🔍
How did Nabbie not get v& for Lolita? Clearly he was speaking from experience in that novel.
Anonymous
7/15/2025, 11:27:15 PM No.24553246
>>24553224
>You're aware that he was teaching at an English-speaking college with mostly monolingual students, right? He himself probably knew enough German to read Kafka.
I’m speaking more in a general sense, not simply talking about his lectures. From everything that is known about Nabokov it’s likely that he didn’t know enough German to read Kafka without a translation.
That being said I agree in part that works such as Ulysses and The Sound and the Fury are way more interesting to examine in regards to language rather than themes, but authors such as Musil and Tolstoy are (linguistically) quite dull yet still thematically interesting.
Replies: >>24554654
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:26:26 AM No.24553422
>amoral artist pretends everyone else is amoral as him so he doesn't have to answer
whoa
Replies: >>24554641
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:36:26 AM No.24553449
>Anonymous users on one of the most despicable websites on the internet talk about morality
I don't actually buy that any of you fuckers are actually moral. I don't buy it at ALL. I think 98% of you LARP when the whimsy suits you and that's about fucking IT. You grandstand on /lit/ or /pol/ one moment and then the next moment you're on any one of the porn boards jerking off to any one of the porn threads here. You're all hypocrites and you don't have the mental capacity or fortitude to even realizeBTW.

You can't be a racist and talk about "morality" btw.
Replies: >>24553515 >>24553617 >>24553660 >>24554393 >>24554400 >>24554641
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:54:03 AM No.24553515
>>24553449
>You can't be a racist and talk about "morality" btw.
what do you mean by racist.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:54:56 AM No.24553517
>>24552572
Lolita reveals how easily people are seduced by cunny
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:55:57 AM No.24553521
>>24552572
>>24552838
jeetgpt saar
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:56:38 AM No.24553523
>>24551881 (OP)
>a fucking retard?
I don't think so. But he was annoying and wrote shit books.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:30:49 AM No.24553617
>>24553449
not responding directly is passive-aggressive faggot behavior btw
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:49:36 AM No.24553660
>>24553449
That's fair, but what's the difference between larping morality and actually being moral? Is acting it out not enough?
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 8:39:46 AM No.24554379
I actually liked the part at the end of the book where he meets Rita, has some angsty self-awareness and fights Quilty pathetically but apparently it wasn't even real? Kinda disappointing
For the rest of the book he's written like a sociopath, who the fuck "sympathizes" with him as a person
Replies: >>24554720
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 8:47:13 AM No.24554393
>>24553449
You're right. I am a hypocrite.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 8:54:49 AM No.24554400
>>24553449
That's like saying you have to be perfect to talk about sin.
Someone can have immoral thoughts and not act on it because they know it's immoral (also thinking something or posting about it here doesn't require the same effort as enacting it in reality)
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 8:56:10 AM No.24554404
>>24552838
It's not because he didn't have an answer. Your bot gave the most generic and superficial rehash of the same themes discussed a thousand times. It's just soulless. Not worth a reply to respond to someone who is only going to copy and paste the answer and think
>Lolita isn’t really about Lolita. We never hear her voice, only Humbert’s version of her.
Is a deep insight into Lolita.
Replies: >>24554646
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 11:56:53 AM No.24554641
>>24553422
he's not amoral he mentions eternal requirements of morality or some shit also said somewhere else art is always moral.

where do they make retards like you man it's like I understand people here are not bright but your only job is to read right? if you did you would have came across him saying these stuff even if you couldn't reach to the right conclusion with your dull mind.

>>24553449
>words on screen is immoral
have you considered maybe the real evil is in people who get their way in life by appearing as moral but their acts literally harm and destroy people when words on screen don't? nah you're too fucking retarded.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:01:52 PM No.24554646
>>24554404
As the guy who generated it and didnt read at first, i just got a few sentences in before noticing obvious flaws like Humbert being self aware.

That dude was delusional, and grows increasingly so. But you apparently read it, found nothing to disagree with and even called it basic interpretation.
Replies: >>24554674
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:10:38 PM No.24554654
>>24553246
fair enough but I'm pretty sure he knew more German than he let on, because he despised Germany after the war and always wanted to signal how little he cares for its culture. It's kinda cringe but whatever. Anyway, he lived in Berlin for 20 years and supposedly translated Heine poems in his youth. Also there's a part in Pale Fire which imitates the rhythm of Goethe's Erlkönig perfectly, suerly he must have read it in the original. Kafka's German is not very filtering, it's not exactly Heidegger. He probably read it with a dictionary by the side.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:35:30 PM No.24554674
>>24554646
A lot of the individual points are enough to raise eyebrows, but if I said
>Humbert is fucking delusional
You'd feed it into ChatGPT and get 3 paragraphs of rhetoric to feel good about the answer. The AI would argue that he's self-aware and lying to YOU the reader, and because GPT users do not read, it would be impossible to quote paragraphs or argue any point because you can feed it back into the model and get 3 more paragraphs of convincing delusion. I was tackling the post as a whole and the fact that every interpretation it gives is superficial:
>1. Many readers (especially new or uncritical ones) find themselves sympathizing with him, or at least being drawn into his version of events. That’s not an accident — that’s the trap Nabokov set on purpose.
>2. The culture around Humbert — hotels, schools, bystanders — lets him get away with it, and so does the reader unless they actively resist the narrative. If you find yourself thinking: "Well, she seemed to like him..." That’s the mirror working.
>3. Lolita isn’t really about Lolita. We never hear her voice, only Humbert’s version of her. This leads readers to project their own biases and fantasies onto her — and Nabokov deliberately withholds her real perspective to make you aware of that.
Which is more to the point. I think you need to take a break from AI as a whole, because it's robbing your reading comprehension and at the very least you were able to realize it fucked up which is a lot more than most GPT users can say.
Replies: >>24554685
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:42:12 PM No.24554685
>>24554674
So you lied and said that there was nothing wrong with the text when their was because you are afraid of ai making you look dumb? Not sure if that's a whole lot better.


>was humbert from lolita delusional
>Yes—Humbert Humbert, the narrator of Lolita, is delusional, manipulative, and profoundly unreliable.
Replies: >>24554686
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:44:09 PM No.24554686
>>24554685
What? Where did I say that you fucking imbecile?
Replies: >>24554694
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:53:22 PM No.24554692
Its+not+the+mom+_db5238793632ee8508c6c06c0525ef2f
Its+not+the+mom+_db5238793632ee8508c6c06c0525ef2f
md5: 7ffbb65860b3e503bba2f4d7c5c54995🔍
>>24551881 (OP)
What's his best work besides Lolita?
Replies: >>24557104
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 12:58:00 PM No.24554694
>>24554686
Dude in your first response you described it as a generic rehash and now you are insisting you knew they first few sentences contained not a rehash but a very obviously glaring flaw that someone who hates ai enough will respond to scathingly but conveniently not mention this?
Not a single original thought on the topic posted itt but you cry about ai.
You dont really deserve a human response.

Serious question:
If i ask to recieve a post that generates the most responses and it will give me bait in order to start an argument. In your opinion is that more based on human nature or on the nature of anonymous social media/4chan?
Replies: >>24554702
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:04:00 PM No.24554702
>>24554694
Yes, these are generic rehashes:
>1. Many readers (especially new or uncritical ones) find themselves sympathizing with him, or at least being drawn into his version of events. That’s not an accident — that’s the trap Nabokov set on purpose.
>2. The culture around Humbert — hotels, schools, bystanders — lets him get away with it, and so does the reader unless they actively resist the narrative. If you find yourself thinking: "Well, she seemed to like him..." That’s the mirror working.
>3. Lolita isn’t really about Lolita. We never hear her voice, only Humbert’s version of her. This leads readers to project their own biases and fantasies onto her — and Nabokov deliberately withholds her real perspective to make you aware of that.
I'm not going to go through every mistake in an AI slop post. Calling someone's post a generic rehash doesn't mean every detail in it is correct and isn't seeded with their own mistakes, but because you've rotted your brain on AI you have no reading comprehension whatsoever.

>If i ask to recieve a post that generates the most responses and it will give me bait in order to start an argument. In your opinion is that more based on human nature or on the nature of anonymous social media/4chan?
Oh yes, you're just pretending to be retarded.
Replies: >>24554706
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:07:00 PM No.24554706
>>24554702
>generate me a post which will recieve the maximum replies on /lit/

Here’s a high-engagement /lit/ post engineered for maximum replies — controversial take, baiting tone, and layered references to draw in all types (pedants, contrarians, pseuds, etc

Ai makes me laff
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:15:18 PM No.24554720
7b15e5d0b500cec896b731cb32732720-1233437256
7b15e5d0b500cec896b731cb32732720-1233437256
md5: 8a3a55f9cd1c5542ef59649bf3961cbd🔍
>>24554379
I don't know if you sympathize with him as in "omg he's literally me" but he doesn't come off as a totally selfish monster because he's the narrator, aka the voice in your head as you read, and he can be charming and funny. If it was written like "That little bitch was fucking hot and I wanted to fuck her right there in front her mom. Nah mean?" Even though if you distill the narrative that's all it was about really. You wouldn't be lulled into reading more and taking the ride.

Charming people who project glamour and sophistication but secretly just wanna fuck prepubescent girls and boys because they're evil or traumatized and broken inside themselves can get away with a lot if people around them fall for the illusion. And these people fall for the illusion themselves in a way if they themselves were traumatized and had a fucked up childhood. Lolita's real name in the book was Dolores Haze aka a dolorous haze aka a painful nostalgia. Nabokov was clearly the opposite of a retard. Few people can play with their native language with that much skill and have that much insight into human nature.
Replies: >>24554865 >>24555407
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 1:15:38 PM No.24554721
>>24552572
Hey ChatBBC, shit my pants for me.
Checkmate robohomo
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 2:44:38 PM No.24554865
>>24554720
Just wanting to fuck kids and the rest being meaningful facade is an incredibly boring way to read Humbert, to the point I don't see how you even manage to entertain the thought
Replies: >>24554869 >>24555101
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 2:45:39 PM No.24554869
>>24554865
*meaningless, of course
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 4:56:18 PM No.24555101
>>24554865
Okay, fart-huffer. Thanks for your contribution.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 6:36:39 PM No.24555301
>>24551881 (OP)
Halfwits like you shouldn’t be allowed to touch his novels. Nabokov was right in his scorning of didactic novel writing. Its horseshit and characteristic of sophistry. Its presenting some commentary, an ideology or some suggestion about the world that should address the critical faculty in a light that is, by its very nature, aesthetic and not critical, viz, emotional appeal. Nabokov is a master of prose and he exists so that we may filter retards like you.
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 7:18:01 PM No.24555407
>>24554720
But I didn't even find him charming, he's extremely judgemental and negative about everything that's not his uoh obsession since the start of the book.
Replies: >>24555924
Anonymous
7/16/2025, 9:52:31 PM No.24555924
>>24555407
He is high energy, child-like, and amusing. He reminded me of PeeWee Herman. He isn't a mindless grunt. He is an excitable little kid in a middle aged man's body and that conflict is funny.
Anonymous
7/17/2025, 4:26:17 AM No.24557104
>>24554692
Pale Fire