*removed*

Calling it a love story isn't glorifying Humbert Humbert. Romeo and Juliet is a love story, and that has a fair few murders and ends with a double suicide. Humbert loves Lolita, and in that sense it is a love story. However, that to call it a love story is reductive, as it's much more than that. Nabokov is also very ironic all the way through, that amount of insincerity doesn't have much in common with love stories.
 
I remember reading the synopsis of this book after listening to Lana del Rey's Off to the Races and hearing that is was based of Lolita. What a...strange story 8(

It seems interesting, and someday I'll get around to reading it. From the synopsis (so I can't give a very good opinion) it seemed like he...loved her. It was more like infatuation though. He was obsessed with her...and it was like his own twisted love. But I wouldn't call it a love story, as they were not two people who were in love.

So while yes it was definitely obsession, wasn't that his own twisted way of "love"? He was obsessed with her because he loved her. A very sick...love.
 
Obsession and love are not mutually exclusive. Nor does the way he treats Dolores show that he doesn't love her, I'm fairly sure that a significant proportion of men who beat and/or kill their girlfriends/wives love them.
This is, I think, for you, a problem about the definition of love. It appears that you are defining love as something that is inherently and totally good, whereas other peoples' definitions vary. My definition certainly doesn't preclude someone being a cunt to someone they love. Love is quite difficult to define, as are all things, as a wise band once said, 'I want to know what love is'.
I also don't think that calling it a love story romanticises the story or paedophilia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top