Should I read this book if I love books but hate paedophiles?

>>8831048
yes, that's the point

File: lolita.jpg (2MB, 2864x1710px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2864x1710px

no. watch the movie and cum buckets to this southern princess

yes, this will cure you of your hatred

>>8831048
Yes
It teaches you to hate pedos and love little girls.

>>8831220
>It teaches you to hate pedos and love little girls.
Love little girls? Turning me into a pedo?

>>8831081
which version of the film is best though. kubrick or the 1999 film with jeremy irons?

>>8831048
>hate paedophiles
He fell for the meme

>>8831048
Read it if you love love and love sex but hate what love and sex make you do.

>>8831766
what if im a kissless virgin desu?

>>8831776
And so was I when I first fell in love with that book.
Have you ever masturbated? That's enough.

>>8831721
>kubrick or the 1999 film with jeremy irons?
>Kubrick
>or 1999
gee, I wonder which one is better, sure confounds me, Anon.

>>8831790
Kubrick is only good if you are autistic. That's why film critics enjoy his pictures so much.

>>8831721
I dunno. Kubrick was great with the mother character, but lo was too old and they didn't do anything even remotely indecent.

File: lolita1_nm.jpg (495KB, 518x800px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 518x800px

>>8831306
It's the only convincing love story of our century.

>>8831721
Kubrick.

Adrian Lyne's po-faced screen translation of Lolita is sentimental when it should be subversive, dreary when it should be comic, and maudlin in a way that almost countermands its central tragedy. Still, its misguided bravery is not without merit—even if the results feel silk-screened. Similarities with Nabokov's writing begin and end with the title. Bizarre.

>>8831721
>>8831830
Do listen to Jeremy Irons' audiobook reading, though. It's great.

>>8831721
They're both shit. The book is infinitely better.

File: image.jpg (47KB, 640x485px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 640x485px

Is there any actual foot fetish in the book?

>>8832111
A bit, Humbert makes a comment about her long feet or something. But nothing major.

>>8832192
Seems legit

Is lolita basically the ITAOTS of literature? Not because they are memes but because they are similar on an emotional level?

No use in hating pedophiles anon. We can't help the way we are.

>>8831721
The Ron Jeremy version.

>>8831721
They both miss the point of the book

>>8831048
Should i read crime and punishment if i love books but hate murderers?

Should i read a christmas carol if i love books but hate tight bastards?

Should i read macbeth if i love books but hate scottish people?

>>8831048
Its a great book, and is not even about pedophilia nor is it about desire or obsession, but rather about our immoral relationship with memories.

>>8832734
what? no.

>>8832921
It's definitely about desire, at least in part. Desire is what drives Humbert, no? What kind of character would he be without it?

>>8832919
Should i read my diary desu if I hate myself?

>>8832939
It is within the fiction of the book, but you have to remember that Lolita as a whole is nothing but the embellished memories of mad Humbert Humbert. The desire he describes, the guilt, the love, the exaggerated characters, the coincidences, the Lolita that he so fondly remembers are only a faint shadow of what really could have happened. We as readers are not sure of the veracity of the events in the books because not even Humbert is sure of them.

>>8832976
Ah I see what you mean. You are looking at the book as a whole and I just focused on the detail. Thanks for posting that.

Know any similar books with unreliable narrators?

>>8831721
i was just talking with a girl and she kept telling me how great 99 version is and how she loves it more than kubrick's.
so kubrick's version should be better

>>8833091
I can only think of The great Gatsby and American psycho

>>8831048
I am sure paedophilophobia is a form of irrational paranoia

>>8833091
Pale Fire

>>8831048
If you're fickle enough to be dissuaded from reading an indisputable classic because of its ribald subject matter then you don't love books, Anon. You like books that mesh with your ethical worldview.

Fucking read it

>>8833505
That book is shit, tbqh. That, and Despair, have led me to believe Nabokov was a one-book-wonder.

>>8833592
>hasn't read Pnin
>hasn't read Laughter in the Dark
>hasn't fucking read Ada or Ardor

How dare you pass such judgement on Nabokov from a place of such inadequacy

>>8833608
Yeah... those all sound meh except Ada so I'll give that a go. What about his essays/lectures on literature?

>>8833633
Try his lectures on The Metamorphosis, I quite liked them; I haven't consumed much of Nabokov's academic work though so I'm not really in a position for an accurate appraisal

>>8832931
Well they're fantasizing about having sex with a 14 year old girl.

>>8832946
i come to /lit/ for the heavy questions

File: 1471579347324.jpg (624KB, 1244x1642px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 1244x1642px

>>8832192
"I kissed the yellowish soles of her long-toed feet. I immolated myself... But it was all of no avail. Both doomed were we."

>>8833592
The poem was kind of shit, but the rest is a pretty funny joke about literary criticism.

>>8833091
The Catcher in the Rye

>>8831048
Yes. You will be conflicted and vindicated at the same time. It's a masterpiece.