General Discussion

AnotherMother4Peace

(4,810 posts)

25. I need to add that the movie character of Lolita thought the older man was a creep & he thought he was God's gift.

Reply to AnotherMother4Peace (Reply #18)

Mon Jul 21, 2025, 02:05 PM

Jul 21

He became obsessed w/her, thinking he was her "world". The Lolita character was a young teen who enjoyed her friends, going places, being a young teen. He was a fucking loser who wanted to glob onto her youth and energy. I see it as exploitation and abuse, but the take away for so many is that it was her "fault" because she dressed like that, acted like that, went to that place, etc. - "she needed to be more modest" - sarcasm.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] milestogo Jul 21 OP

The character Lolita, age 13, was repeatedly raped by the narrator of the book. hedda_foil Jul 21 #1

But Humbert doesn't see it that way. milestogo Jul 21 #2

The reader however, does see it as such Torchlight Jul 21 #3

I read the book a long time ago milestogo Jul 21 #5

I've never read the forward either. But is was pretty clear Humbert is to be seen as a horrible person. emulatorloo Jul 21 #7

The forward merely validated an already existent theme Torchlight Jul 21 #9

Humbert Humbert is what's called an "unreliable narrator." Reader knows he's a full of shit pedophile. emulatorloo Jul 21 #4

Because Jilly_in_VA Jul 21 #6

Background usonian Jul 21 #8

Agree Starbeach Jul 21 #10

Horrible Humbert Express would be a better name. milestogo Jul 21 #12

k and r BoRaGard Jul 21 #11

The term is despicable, implying legitimacy. The old pedophile lie/excuse of "she initiated it". AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #13

It implies exploitation and abuse. Torchlight Jul 21 #14

The movie version portrayed Lolita as a seductive underaged "slut" w/the older man at her mercy. He just AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #18

Your inference is not a common one. Torchlight Jul 21 #23

My "inference" of Lolita is a common one as evidenced by the term "Lolita Express" - a fucking slam on the young victims AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #26

No one would want to admit they find degeneracy "cutesy" Torchlight Jul 21 #28

"We" would be interested in your objective findings as well. It sounds like your sampling was limited AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #31

I need to add that the movie character of Lolita thought the older man was a creep & he thought he was God's gift. AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #25

There are 2 movie versions of Lolita milestogo Jul 21 #30

Oh - interesting. I watched the 1962 version once & cannot watch it again - too dark for me as a victim myself. AnotherMother4Peace Jul 21 #32

Agree. MorbidButterflyTat Jul 21 #35

There are actually two pedophiles in the story: Humbert and Quilty milestogo Jul 21 #36

You may want to reread Lolita, because you didn't get it on the first go around. Cuthbert Allgood Jul 21 #15

You may want to reread my OP, because you didn't get it on the first go around. milestogo Jul 21 #16

Lolita is the term that is used because it's the title. Cuthbert Allgood Jul 21 #17

Stupid and gross. milestogo Jul 21 #19

Never said stupid; I said they don't get it. Cuthbert Allgood Jul 21 #38

Imply is to Infer as Pitch is to Catch Torchlight Jul 21 #21

Nabokov was a modernist Cuthbert Allgood Jul 21 #27

Crap. I originally responded to your post thinking it was one above it. Torchlight Jul 21 #29

It's all good Cuthbert Allgood Jul 21 #33

Indeed. writerJT Jul 21 #37

Jeez, did you read the book? Warpy Jul 21 #20

Ah, so its a novel about self-stimulation. milestogo Jul 21 #24

Uh, no Warpy Jul 21 #39

Good. You should. Iggo Jul 21 #22

I agree. MorbidButterflyTat Jul 21 #34