Monday, May 23, 2011
Questions, Questions, (unanswered) Questions..
At the conclusion of the novel, Humbert states the thought of a name "And I have toyed with many pseudonyms for myself before I hit on a particularly apt one. There are many in my notes "Otto Otto" and "Mesmer Mesmer" and "Lambert Lambert," but for some reason I think my choice expressed the nastiness best" (Nabokov 308). Perhaps this is Humberts way of saying the whole story was a lie, considering he changed his name in order to write the novel. However, Humbert openly admits to his wrong doings towards Loltia. It makes the reader wonder if Humbert is even Humbert's real name. Perhaps there are other parts of the novel that are made up too. Maybe Humbert was lying about Lolita throwing herself onto him, at the same time, he may have been lying that he had touched her. But the reader knows that Humbert is in jail. Although he is in jail for having killed Quilty, perhaps that is all he is in jail for and no one but he and Lolita know about the past that he and Lolita experienced. Quilty would have been the only other person who knew what happened, other than Charlotte, but she had died too. And now that Quilty is dead, is it true that only Humbert and Lolita know the truth?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree, Cassie. Humbert is an unreliable narrator and this becomes clear right from the start of the novel. Readers are only receiving his point of view, therefore, how can one know if this story is the full truth? Humbert is a questionable character because he portrays himself as innocent, but it is clear that he is a pedophile. While Humbert tries to convince readers that Lolita is a promiscuous nymphet that is wrongly seducing him, it is clear that he is the one who is guilty due to the fact that he is in jail while writing this story.
ReplyDelete