[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 166 KB, 384x615, lolita-book-cover..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1860732 No.1860732 [Reply] [Original]

Thoughts?

>> No.1860753

The prose gave me an erection at multiple points in the book.

Also, when is the Pedophile Rights Movement going to start? Everyone hated the gays before their rights movement with the exact same hate we see towards pedophiles today. As a matter of fact, why is it that most people associate the word pedophile with "a man who wants to touch little boys?" That's because pedophiles are the new medium to hate gays through.

>> No.1860769

>>1860753
I actually agree with you. There is a difference between a pedophile and a child molester, and people don't seem to see that. Honestly I feel pity for pedophiles because unlike gays and crossdressers and other sexual deviants they have to suppress themselves.

However I wanted this to be a discussion about the literature itself. I mean obviously pedophilia is a big theme but let's not solely talk about that.

>> No.1860773

>>1860753
I seriously hope you're trolling.

>> No.1860782
File: 55 KB, 400x420, 1306819182056.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1860782

>>1860753
>>1860769

>> No.1860785

>>1860769
I know, I felt I had to express my opinion. Lolita is still one of my favorite books of all time simply because of the absolutely beautiful prose. I wish I could talk like H.H. does in his stream of consciousness. Nabokov has mastered one of the subtler things I enjoy in literature as well: picking words that are enjoyable to be read for their sound alone. Even without meaning his prose is music for my ears.

>>1860773
If this was the 80s and I said I wasn't gay, but supported gay rights, people would think I was trolling too. I am not a pedophile, but I think pedophiles should have more rights.

>> No.1860786

>>1860753

WTF are you talking about, pedo (as in a man being attracted to women of all ages, at least <10) was the norm 100 years ago, it's being phased out because in modern times the shits fuckin wrong in every way.

It's not at all like the gay's, as they were persecuted and are now accepted because we know now that there is nothing at all wrong with being gay.

Soon the biological attraction that we all have (Chloë Moretz at the Comedy Awards got every dude going, and don't even try to deny it! Look up the pic's if you haven't seen.) will die off, just like liking fat chicks did.

>> No.1860790 [DELETED] 

>>1860769
>>1860753
0/10

There's a difference between being gay and fucking up someone's life by early childhood because you can't control your desires. I'm sorry, just no. Do not associate homosexuality with pedophilia.

The book is more a tract against Freud than about the morality involved with pedophilia, at least, it was the last time I read it.

>> No.1860793

>>1860790
Please do not associate pedophilia with child molestation.

>> No.1860794

>>1860769
It is 100% normal to like a young women.
>>1860790
>freud
only jews and communists care about him.

also: fags are a disgusting abomination.

>> No.1860800

>>1860790
This could be good discussion. Elaborate about how it was a tract against Freud please.

>> No.1860804

>>1860786
I never said I wasn't aware of this recent trend. It was the Industrial Revolution that created the teenager; yes, that thing you call a teenager was called an adult before the I.R., and if that adult was a male 13 year old boy, it would be sent off to work since school was too expensive. If that 13 year old adult was a girl, it would be married off as soon as possible to be put to use in cooking and general house-keeping.

The Industrial Revolution eliminated the need for much manual labor, and allowed public schools to be successful. Thus the teenager was born, and the adult has to see their child for another 5 years--and there are many disputes and anger tossed from one another, as a female cat will want to get rid of her children once they reach the proper age--or they will fight.

And so, we have an angry cat of a mother and a bunch of adults that are ready to go into the world--but are restrained by the phantom called "the teenager".

>> No.1860806

>>1860786

>Soon the biological attraction that we all have will die off, just like liking fat chicks did.

That could happen, but it's going to take long time. Until then we're alls upposed to deny the fact that a 12 yr old CAN look sexy as fuck.

>> No.1860808

>>1860790
>a child engages in sexual activity with an adult that in no way physically harms him (use your imagination)

You have two choices. You tell this child "That was OK" or you tell him "That was bad, you got ABUSED" and give him a big frown.

You non-pedophiles are the ones who abuse children.

>> No.1860809

>>1860753
There used to be a reasonably large "pedophile rights movement", but it died off with the radical left. (Oddly enough, many of the more open advocates of adult-child sex at the time were feminists -- Shulamith Firestone, Kate Millett, Pat Califia, etc.) That's probably a good thing, since sexual contact with children is inherently exploitative.

That said, not all pedophiles molest children, and those people deserve help, not hatred. http://b4uact.org/ has the right approach. It's arguably a "pedophile rights group" with state funding.

>> No.1860810
File: 23 KB, 250x250, 1297523608667.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1860810

I realize not all pedophiles are child molesters, but honestly.

>finding little kids sexually attractive

>> No.1860818

>>1860790
>he thinks a genius like Nabokov gave a shit about Freud

If a book has two parent figures in it, you can read it however you want in Freudian terms. You argue against pedophilia, but support Freud? He was nothing but a cocaine-addicted stepping stone for future of psychology.

>> No.1860816

>>1860810
>>1860810

Oh come on, have you SEEN BELLA THORNE???

>> No.1860820

Nabokov did have a period of travellling around the U.S. as a lecturer. The places most of these lectures were given were at universities. I, personally, have the feeling that he didn't like 'something' about the university structure in the United States. This feeling was manifest in his character Humbert dealing with it, as he was from Europe.

It seemed to come down to an immaturity. This immaturity was both, fortunately and unfortunately, within and without.

Europe dealing with America, the end.

>> No.1860823

>>1860806

as a Catholic, 100 or 200 years is not a long time. Shit will phase out because it's wrong, and no one can deny. And I fully and happily support the gay's!

>> No.1860825

>>1860809
>sexual contact with children is inherently exploitative.

I'll agree and I think there should be laws, but a lot of them are arbitrary. It really depends on the person. I know 13 year olds that know what the fuck is up and are more worldly than some 30 year olds. It is entirely possible to exploit, manipulate and damage anyone sexually no matter what age.

>> No.1860826

>>1860816

Oh come on, have you SEEN THIS CREEPY BETA ANON WHO FAPS TO GIRLS BECAUSE WOMEN REPRESENT WHAT HE CAN'T HAVE

>> No.1860833

>>1860826

Cool projection, bro

>> No.1860837

>>1860809
>That's probably a good thing, since sexual contact with children is inherently exploitative.

How so?

>> No.1860838

>>1860825

Very true, in fact you've got me thinking about how cool it would be to sexually exploit a 40 yr old woman.

>> No.1860844

>>1860833

Cool butthurt creep, bro.

>> No.1860845 [DELETED] 

>>1860794
It is not normal to like prepubescent children. This desire is a reflection of the pedo's inability to feel comfortable around human beings his own age, for whatever reason. I'm done arguing with you, this is retarded.
>>1860800
Well, if you know anything about Nabokov it's that he really hated Freud. He didn't like how Freud could reduce and determine people's lives with a couple theories/rules.

Lolita is basically an attempt to show how life can never be reduced or entirely explained by some simple theories. From what I remember, Humbert explains his pedophilia with some unfulfilled childhood desire he had, but if we know anything, it's that we can't trust Humbert. The psychiatrist at the end (or is it the beginning? I forget) said that Humbert is actually a repressed homosexual, but again it doesn't seem to take into account the complexities of his life, something we feel as a reader, who's constantly torn between feeling sympathy for Humbert and being completely repulsed.

It's been a while since I've read it, and I'm half-assing it. I think it's probably misleading to say it's a tract against Freud, because Nabokov really hated "ideas" in novels. A better way of putting might be the impossibility of reducing and completely understanding someone's life. It seems like any explanation you could give to Humbert ultimately has to leave something essential out.

>> No.1860850

Just finished reading this a few hours ago, actually. I thought it was beautifully written. It was the first work by Nabokov that I've read, and I look forward to reading more of his. I found myself surprised that I was sympathizing so much with a fictional "pervert".

>> No.1860856

>>1860845
>It is not normal to like prepubescent children. This desire is a reflection of the pedo's inability to feel comfortable around human beings his own age, for whatever reason. I'm done arguing with you, this is retarded.

great, but how do you account for non-exclusive pedophiles who actively chase women their own age?

>> No.1860857 [DELETED] 

>>1860808
This 100% bullshit. I sincerely hope this is a troll because it's getting all of my rage right now.

Please, just fucking kill yourself.

>> No.1860859

>>1860845
>It is not normal to like the same sex. This desire is a reflection of the homo's inability to feel comfortable around human beings the opposite sex, for whatever reason. I'm done arguing with you, this is retarded.

>> No.1860863

>>1860856

I guess both yall haven't thought on this: >>1860786 , yet

>> No.1860866

>>1860863
blah blah blah attraction is all societal influence. the guy has some points but he's wrong on that end.

>> No.1860865

WTF is going on in this thread?Are people who read Lolita actually being turned into pedophiles?That wasn't Nabokav's intention!

>> No.1860868

>>1860856
I know this a troll. It's rare, and when they do it's always an inferior substitute.

There is no way in hell that a prepubescent child is in any way consenting.

kill everyone in this thread

>> No.1860871

>>1860865

i lol'd, I guess his book is just the proper root to talk about the topic, I am enjoying it though, my brain is just and content on the topic, but I will observe in case of new and decent arguments

>> No.1860872

>>1860868
not trolling, actually.

>inferior substitute

LOL okay, right

>can't consent

why not?

>> No.1860877

this isn't a good thread

>> No.1860879

>>1860877
>>1860877

i'm deeply sorry some of us have differing views from you.

>> No.1860884

>>1860865
Look, You are on 4chan. The idea that "olders can like youngers" should, at least, be an anectdotal evedant.

C'mon y'all, we're dealing with something obvious here, something that Nabakov saw as an obvious tenant for a narrative and then decided to use as a trope to examine societal and cultural differences within his story.

If any of you are thinking of being "writers" I hope you can see the tools being used here.

>> No.1860891

>>1860879

it was a sage based purely on posting quality

>> No.1860893

>>1860884
there's a difference between 'authorial intent' and 'reader interpretation.' on one hand, it's a solid interpretation I commend you for seeing, as it's definitely one of the more solid theories on the novel. on the other hand, Nabokov was an aesthete; he certainly did not consciously intend on it

>> No.1860895

>>1860884

I haven't read the story yet, but I would love it if you could elaborate.

>> No.1860897

>>1860893
...keep going...

>> No.1860901

People who justify pedophilia with this novel cannot into irony, and quite frankly, should be shot.

I bet you're the same people who watch or read Fight Club and go and start a fight club.

Death of the author is not about justifying your stupid interpretations and inability to perceive irony.

>> No.1860902

>>1860895
You are are going to have to read it. It will constantly make you think about many things.

>> No.1860905

>>1860897
i think the 'certainly did not intend on using those aspects as devices to commentate on society and culture' is discernible from what I said.

>>1860901
who justifies pedophilia using this novel? pro-pedo here, I seriously don't know any rational person who would

>> No.1860907

>>1860901
I like this novel beause I was into pedophilia when I was a child, and, understood that I shouldn't be sexually aware and into people around who weren't.

>> No.1860917

Does any one ever think about that old poetic addage, "I want what I can never have."?

Isn't Lolita simply a meditation on that? and the reprecussions of trying to attain that?

>> No.1860926

>>1860917
possibly. it fits well with him gradually becoming repulsed by her on their trips, and eventually coming back to her once she's truly gone from him.

>> No.1860928

>>1860845
>This desire is a reflection of the pedo's inability to feel comfortable around human beings his own age, for whatever reason.

You obviously haven't read a single paper on pedophilia's etiology in your life -- at least not one written after the 90s. Not even defending pedophilia, it's a mental illness, but you're an idiot.

>> No.1860930

>>1860893
Grow up, faggot. "Authorial intent" and "Reader Interpretation" should be one in the same, BECAUSE it is only coming from one persons mind who creates a narrative.

>> No.1860935

Yet another example of /lit/ becoming /r9k/

On /r9k/, pedophilia argument threads were frequent and always attracted a lot of posters.

Most because two tripfag pedophiles would see that it was so.

>> No.1860942

>>1860930
I'd raise some of my own points (if authorial intent was the only mode of interpretation then you could not root for any other character besides the 'intended protagonist,' a fallacy anyone can see through), but given your unwarranted use of 'faggot,' I'll just direct you to the essay and save myself the trouble:

http://faculty.smu.edu/nschwart/seminar/fallacy.htm

>> No.1860943

>>1860935
/LIT/'S ALWAYS BEEN LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY ABOUT LOLITA.

>> No.1860944 [DELETED] 

>>1860928
Explain. I find the whole concept of mental illness very vague.

I've known two (recovering, or whatever you call it) pedophiles in my life. And these people simply cannot interact with adults. There's a handful of adults they feel comfortable around, but never more than that.

>> No.1860945

>>1860935
I'm not a tripfag, nor do I come to /lit/ often (although I'd like to because I like literature) but Nabokov is an extremely interesting author who is only talked about because of Lolita. Which isn't that big of a deal because any one who reads it will realize it's a fascinating and non-one-sided novel.

>> No.1860951

>>1860945
okay, make a new thread discussing Pale Fire or Ada and I'll be happy to discuss whatever literary interpretation you have on those novels.

>> No.1860957

>>1860942
the use of "faggot" was enabled in order to ingratiate myself in to your tribe. I'm much less offensive IRL. I'll read the essay if you can prove yourself on this image board, with your own words.
The distance between the creator and the perciever is vast, and causes many spelling errors.

>> No.1860959

>>1860951
Fuck, I need to read both.

>> No.1860963

>>1860957
...if I can 'prove' myself? lolwhat

>> No.1860992

>>1860959
Ada > Lolita > Pale Fire

I'd say