writers generally don't like to be asked what their book is trying to say. They will often tell you that everything it is trying to say is in the book.
Not today. Too many writers today like to say their books said something about some sort of social justice, oppression or some sort of identity politics. It prevent them from creating unique characters and original plots, since it felt more like reading fanfictions or blog posts newspaper. When I was growing up, writers try create a story, and how you relate the story to the real world is the message.
Nabokov's philosophy was that books were meant to be hedonistic experiences. He hated writers like Victor Hugo who tried to use their books to spur political/social movements. It flies in the face of the current postmodern belief that all art is meant to influence society. Nabokov's other masterpiece, Pale Fire, similarly pokes fun at how people misunderstand his art for the sake of their own interests
Nabokov is indeed uncomfortable in this interview, but mostly due to his personal fear that he would be misinterpreted, not from trying to hide some nymphet obsession. Nabokov is infatuated with butterflies and language, not nymphets; that Humbert is a pedophile is just an aspect of the novel that Nabokov came up with in a fit of artistic inspiration and planning. This is like saying that since Charles Kinbote is a stalker, liar, and thief in Pale Fire, then Nabokov must be too.
@Christina R I guess he wanted to show people that monsters are real life people. No comment in this thread for 7 years. And we both comment in it on same day.
@Christina R It is possible that someone close to him was a pedophile which inspired him into something like this. Frankly speaking, my best friend is a pedophile (he is 17 and likes preteen boys and girls). He himself sometimes feel guilty about his emotions but he can't help it. I try to talk him out of it and if the situation gets worse I will surely recommand him to a psychiatrist. So see I can get inspired to write about this, from their viewpoint, as I got to know things from him.
@Christina R Yeah sitting here in quarantine tons of free time. True dracula is depressing but I really liked Bram Stoker's style, that he used letter, journals to tell the story.
I think he's a first-rate writer and unfairly criticized. Because of what I've heard and read about Lolita, I thought it'd be a second-rate popular fiction novel but it turned out to be, along with Pale Fire, among the best and most beautiful novels I've ever read.
Lolita is hebephilia disguised as high art. I mean he wrote a novella titled The Enchantress which was a precursor to Lolita which was pretty straight forward novella about a middle aged man who was a sexual predator without all the artsy literary stuff. Look at how he fumbles on his words from 4:35 onwards trying to make it seem like the books are really inspired by baboons and some abstract artsy idea as if it makes logical sense to make it about an old dude who has the hots for young girls LOL. Wake up people.
I'd like to say 'thank you' for uploading this piece of footage. Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov is (in my opinion) the master of prose. A writer whose talent continues to be unparalleled.
@@anshulmanapure1980 the comment is very old so I’ll answer, he’s saying Humbert is delusional and cannot be trusted with his accounts. So if he saw a hawk, he could think it was a handbag and vice versa
When Nabokov said “I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child” I thought he was being modest. The remark was a much more honest self-assessment than I thought.
I just listened to the audio book version of Lolita and it's so perfectly read by Jeremy Irons--he captures the nuances of Humbert Humbert's personality impeccably, and his reading of the poetic sequences will break your heart.
Before overpraising Jeremy Irons (who landed the Humbert role in such an awful remake ) You should hear Vladimir reading the final confrontation with Quilty. It'll blow your hair back !
I haven’t read the book yet, but clearly by the fact that I’m here, my curiosity is obviously growing. What made it the most beautifully written book to your estimation?
@@jacobtaylor2850 Nabokov has said that it was an experiment with the English language and all it's possibilities. He was taught English by a governess. I picked the book up (a battered Corgi paperback) from a second-hand shop. I read the first two paragraphs and was hooked. Nabokov doesn't miss a trick with the prose. It's exquisite, brutal, tender and erotic. Of course, the subject is taboo, but there is not one sentence which is sordid and filthy. We read the story of a man and his obsession (a girl who reminds him of his childhood sweetheart who died young). It's subtle, funny, sad. Humbert's frustration and paranoia pervade the tale with a lyricism which Nabokov excells at. When asked, the author actually believed that love could exist this way. He certainly demonstrated this without resorting to filth. Enjoy, my friend. Thank you for your reply.
@@kelman727 Respectfully, Nabokov's "solecisms" contribute intentionally to the texture and tone of the novel. Hiding behind strict grammatical constructs as such is an irrational way to approach novels that purposefully eschew them. (Correlary: The statement "I don't like James Joyce because of his solecisms" would be absolutely bull-headed.)
As Trilling says "we cannot trust the creative artist to say what he has done"--Nabokov is smirking in the background as he takes in this most welcome compliment. He thought of himself as an "enchanter" above all else.
Finally! I get to hear my favorite writer speak! I love how even his story of inspiration for the book is fiction. Thank you so much for finding this and uploading it.
Nabokov was very nostalgic about his childhood and he wrote a lot about it, you can see how much did he missed that part of his life. So I assume, he did associate himself with Humbert, but not as an old man , but that young boy he was when he met his first love during his stay in the family house in the country All the story is about his dreams to return to those emotions during his childhood and adolescence , his first expreince of love and sex.
Read Dostoyevsky because he is brilliant. He is different from Nabokov in that he doesn't use language poetically, he isn't stylistically that good a writer you could say, but his stories as incredible, absolutely incredible. Start with "Notes From Underground", it's nice and short and sums up Dostoyevsky's style quite well. Or Crime and Punishment for that matter.
I've always been in love with Nabokov's "Pale Fire". I'm not sure I've ever found such a gorgeously poetic book so hilarious...and the story is just that (at least to me), absurdly funny. Then, of course, there are many shades of gray retained within the experimental novel. John Shade's name should be telling enough. If you can't tell already, I'm a big Nabokov fan :P
Anyone who thinks that Nabokov and Humbert Humbert are "like minded" are being absolutely absurd. And 90% of the comments under this video are simply idiotic. Most seem to be from Americans trying to find a scandal in here somewhere (as usual). You see the way Lolita is written, it really does feel like the author has purposely created Humbert Humbert to be absolutely as un-relatable as possible, especially in how he pseudo-rationalises everything he does and lies to the reader. The way Lolita is portrayed in the book as being simply the impression Humbert Humbert has of her. Nabokov is so detached and artistically minded with respect to main character in this way, that he simply couldn't have been on Humbert Humbert's side. The fact that he's crafted such an unlikeable character, again, _on purpose,_ shows Nabokov obviously wasn't just trying to... whatever you think he was trying to do if he was himself a pedophile. The work ceases to make any sense if Nabokov were actually sympathetic to Humbert Humbert. He does his damnedest to make sure the reader isn't. Yes he did plenty of research on pedophiles for the creation of his main character, but in the form of academic case studies from psychological journals. Some commentators will actually attempt the pathetic joke: "oh yeah, 'research,' I bet he really enjoyed doing all of that 'research' haha wink wink." And here I must simply ask, do you really think he was sitting there with an academic journal and secretly hiding, I don't know, Nymphet Weekly, behind it like in a cartoon? He took about as much interest in the experts who studied the predator's minds as he did in the predators themselves, but there is no evidence, anywhere, that he took an interest in 'nymphets.' Nabokov was interested, as can be seen throughout his work, in the minds of other people, especially when they were so very different from his own. The subjective experiences of those whom most of us would view as being alien. Distorted realities through distorted eyes. To my own mind, art is about the communication of the subjective experience. Most authors do this by crafting a narrator who views the world much like they themselves do. You can tell when this is happening. Read Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, David Foster Wallace, Proust, all wrote in such a way that their work gives one insight into how they saw the world, and reflects on their understanding of what art _should be_ (I myself have expressed my own views on what I think art _should be_ just now). Incidentally, most praise or criticism directed at these authors stems from the reader either agreeing or disagreeing with their view of the world, or from the agree/disagree-ment of the reader with the author's version of the 'artistic ideal.' Nabokov's own artistic ideal was to make the author as invisible as possible. If you look at his literary criticisms, you will see that he 'detests' when the author projects their views onto the characters, or tries to use them as mere mouthpieces to force a moral or political message. This is why he didn't like most of Tolstoy, but for War and Peace, Anna Karenina and The Death of Ivan Ilyich, which he appreciated because they didn't try to push a Christian narrative as with Tolstoy's other works, but were much more about the characters and their humanity. He disliked all of Dostoevsky for the same reason, as everything he wrote was trying to convey a pro-Christianity message in one way or another- his work literally revolved around it. Nabokov on the other hand, wanted to explore new ground with art. How's about we don't merely try to solve the riddle of [our] humanity with art, but simply highlight that [our] humanity is more of a riddle than even we ourselves would ever want to come to terms with. This is that "tingle" or "sob" in the spine as it were.
Lolita was not Nabokov's only exploration of that topic. The aesthetic beauty of nymphets was a theme he returned to again and again. As dedicated Nabokovian Martin Amis put it, "he simply enjoyed the topic too much." Either way, he's the greatest writer in modern times.
His English is not that bad. I think he was more awkward appearing on camera, having to give quick replies to an interviewer's questions. That explains the note cards. Look up Keroac on Steve Allen. He also appears to be incredibly shy. We have to understand that back in the 50's, television was just starting up. Having cameras shoved in your face was anxiety-inducing to people not used to such public exposure Not the same now, where we've embraced the Orwellian Eye a little more.
My most personal favourite writer! Brilliant in all aspects. I loved "LOLITA", but there are also his magical epic-novel "ADA OR ARDOR", his magnificent and thrilling "PALE FIRE" or his beautifuly cruel "DESPAIR" and "CAMERA OBSCURA". The only novel I've not read yet is "TRANSPARENT THINGS". How is it? His short-stories are aslo something out of this world.
Lolita has been my favorite novel since I first read it in high school, and it never occurred to me that until now I'd never even seen a picture of him. I confess I'd imagined him being a bit more dashing in the looks department, but the wit is just as I'd pictured it.
i'm on chapter 16 of the first part and I must say this novel is AWESOME! THe lyrical style is engaging and after having read 2 so-called classics that were complete garbage (Catch 22 and For Whom the Bell Tolls) back to back this was a great change. Both novels were a complete bore, I counted the pages between chapters and was paralyzed by fear when the number rose above 7 with Nabokov I feel the chapters go quickly, and not just because they're mostly short.
Am curious whether anyone recalls Lionel Trilling out of Columbia U ?? Given writers' general disdain for critics, it is telling of Trilling's stature that VN sits on par with him… btw On SoundCloud fans can listen to Nabokov reading the final scene with Quilty and it's quite a sendup of that "semi-animated subhuman trickster" You'll never be able to hear the audiobook reading by Jeremy Irons without a longing that it were VN speaking.
@ObeyTheSloth He was a writer, not a public speaker. As he himself stated, "I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child". Therefore perhaps he used those cue cards. : ) I wish I could hear him speaking Russian, his native language... As for touching hearts, he wakes up imagination in his readers; many people lack imagination, while sentimentality is not that rare.
VN explains in Strong Opinions, a book collection of interviews, that spontaneous eloquence seems to him miraculous, and that in interviews (many of them? most?) he is in fact reading from note cards, and indeed I believe some pages can be discerned in the clip!
Not many readers are as smart as N And Humbert to be able to work out The intricacies and clues of this tale. At the end of the day. the reader's left With the text as writer and character Vanish into the text, but each reading Sees them with more focus and attention. This Lolita must be read many times.
Indeed, I've noticed that, in the modern literary canon, Pale Fire seems to have caught a phantom wind, pushing it retrospectively toward the front of a lot of critics lists.
from William F. Buckley's Eulogy - He reminisces about his declination of my bid to go on Firing Line. It would have taken me two weeks of preparation, he says almost proudly, reminding me of his well-known rule against improvising. Every word he ever spoke before an audience had been written out and memorized, he assured me-isn’t that right, Vera? Well no, he would answer questions in class extemporaneously. Well obviously! He laughed. He could hardly program his students to ask questions to which he had the answers prepared! I demur: His extemporaneous style is fine, just fine; ah, he says, but before an audience, or before one of those . . . television . . . cameras, he would freeze. He ordered a brandy, and in a few minutes we rose, and he and Vera and I walked ever so slowly to the doors. “As long as Western civilization survives,” Christopher Lehmann-Haupt wrote in the Times last Tuesday, “his reputation is safe. Indeed, he will probably emerge as one of the greatest artists our century has produced.” I said goodbye warmly, embracing Vera, taking his hand, knowing that probably I would never see again-never mind the artist-this wonderful human being.
Армянин и славянка . 😊😊😊😊😊 Я не имею средств наличных, машин, костюмов и домов, хотя мой вид вполне приличный, прочёл три дюжины томов. Я полон сотнями стараний, сплетеньем мыслей и острот, исканьем между осознаний и кладом внутренних красот. Я меховой, как пёс безродный, разумный, тёплый и простой, и справедливый, беспородный с татуированной средой. Так вот позвольте, мисс благая, без роз, колье, богатств иных, средь рестораций, улиц мая Вас пригласить в мир грёз моих!
@why760nitro "a book about child molestation" (I am using the exact words you used to describe this book) can help in many ways rather than just being a work of arts. first thing first, it's about knowing and understanding the thoughts going on in Humbert Humbert's mind, because it is extra hard when you try to know how people like him view the world and what leads them to do what they do. Secondly, anything can be 'fine literature' if it can pull out the core of a human being, & of a situation.
Interesting you should say that, I just finished Lolita about a week ago and read Nabokov's feeling about didactic literature and how he felt literature should not impart a moral but rather it should be art to be enjoyed (paraphrasing a lot) I have to say though that i can enjoy both types of literature. I might give Dostoevsky a shot anyway.
As much as I have enjoyed VN's work the only novel that verged on provoking any kind of 'sob in the spine' was Pnin, his most finely drawn and sympathetic character. There is not a single character in 'Lolita' [ and I agree w/ Bloom that VN too often indulged in caricature] that does not verge on the pathetic. It is an especially savage little monster executed with a jewelers eye and misanthropes temperment.
My paperback version is 250 pages even. It reads quickly. The brothers karamazov I read in high school but it was over my head then. i need to go back and reread that one myself.
Stephen King actually unalived hundreds of people, that's why he writes so realistically about unaliving people. Instead of discussing Nab's book, let's talk about how I was touched when I was a child. My story is soooo much more important than anything else in this comment section.
Funny how Wladimir tried to escape from talking about "touching hearts and minds" and "messages". How desperatehe he was rushing to the salutary sofa, but...the attempt feailed, the refugee was caught up and totured by way of listening to the bookenist opinion on "Lolita". After such a cruel punishment Nabokov gave up, and finally began to explain the aim of the book...
uhmfar I am certain you are right [ and I am certain of everything]. In any event,this interview gives me a stronger resolution re my image of Pnin, his kindest offering.
Literature as a koan for moral reading. Or maybe not just moral reading, but any reading that supposes meaning, an outside meaning. I like that, good point.
Nabokov wrote a few wonderful books no one read, so he provoked the reader with the book which was controversial and won a Nobel Prize. Isn't what American culture is bazed on?
Pierre Berton with his trademark bow-tie is the interviewer. A great personality in his own write. There was a time when the CBC was the intended medium. I would like to think that McLuhan was influenced by CBC content when he first wrote about the message. You don't see anything like this nowadays. Oh, and Nabokov is none too shabby either.
I found Pale Fire [ which I failed to finish] snarky, derivative and endlessly self congratulating. And the unfinshing finshed me re reading anything further. So, I cling to the older stuff; Laughter in the Dark, King, Queen , Knave, The Defense, Pnin and Lolita. VN is, all in all, something of sadistic pupeteer, his well measured but florid style disguising his fear of sleep and dreaming.
Fascinating interview! The interviewer clearly wants to get VN to own up to something which is not there for VN to own up to. No wonder he disliked interviews in later life.
Speaking as someone who learned English as a second language at an early age, it's very easy to lose any accent (though never entirely) through linguistic immersion. Keep in mind that Nabokov had already been living in the USA for a while at the time this interview was made.
He was born into a wealthy Russian aristocratic family before the Revolution and learned to read and speak English and French when he was a young boy. He learned all his languages simultaneously, more or less.
I am fascinated and disturbed by the anecdote Mr. Nabokov recounts at the end of this video about the artist-ape in the Jardin des Plantes. Does anyone know if the newspaper article Nabokov read can be found?
Maybe I have read too many very graphic sex novels, but imo Lolita does not come close in shock value to many other books I've read. Actually, I think I can take out the subject matter and read it as if it were any other kind of book, any other situation. It could be anything. It could be a love story about two heterosexual rhinosori, we don't know. The point is we appreciate the creativity and brilliance of the writer, of the artist.
Lolita is a devious and snarky delight I look forward to reading again. But the greatest writer of English prose since Shakespeare? Nabokov is a brilliant stylist, but all too often his characters are deliberate caricatures, verging on the apsychological [ PNIN stands as an exception], pinned to the page, never to surprise but always to satisfy the authors imperious misanthropy. He is, in short, an elegant sadist.
It is true that he was probably reading from notecards, or that he'd memorized his responses. He admits this in Strong Opinions; he calls spontaneous eloquence a miracle and admits that he used notecards in some filmed interview. Anyway, the story about the poor creature drawing its cage is completely invented by VN! Finally, this was the first time I'd heard his voice. whaaat a playa. I was expecting a deeper, richer, more intimidating voice, though..
Pish Posh. Lolita is a cautionary story that is relevant to the course of every love affair, and every marriage; try reading it with both hands next time, Skitzo.
Jajaja well, I understand you perfectly, so is mine. ADA OR ARDOR is probably the most perfect novel I've ever read. ADA and PALE FIRE, actually. You got excellent tastes, I can tell. Greeting! :)
Lionel Trilling who mistook this work as a love story, totally missing the overwhelming kill count, gets more than one sideways look of suspicion from Nabokov.
2:10 So Nabokov just gets up and moves to the couch. C'mon boys, let's get cozy on the setee. Staging for tv shows was still in it's infancy. Newscasters in the early 50s used to get up, walk around, sit on the front desk and use pointers on maps all while reading the news.
Well...I have an EXTREMELY discerning ear (have been the control for the audio component of several neural network studies) but I'll consider your comment. FWIW, I recently took great satisfaction in nailing the fact that Glenn Ford is Canadian (I believe the tip-off was "out"). I guess he should've used Lorne Greene's vocal coach.
Intriguing summary. I read Lolita as an indictment against post-war American shallowness. NV was right in his Humbertian assessment of this country. Look at it today. See Lolita ambling about the isles of Walmart! Check out Jarmusch's homage to Nabokov (and maybe also to Kubrick) in "Broken Flowers".
Please. If you compare his performance here to how articulate he liked to be, and how articulate he was in print, you can clearly see why he stopped doing TV interviews as soon as he could get away with it.
The notion that all geniuses are criminals is certainly provocative [ and I provided a short list of unashamed 'meanies'] and I suppose their contempt for the various dominant cultures and subcultures of their respective eras was useful for obvious reasons but that said I also believe there are many genuises who would not have been able to produce any kind of worthwhile art had they not been able to silence their more monstrous aspects.
Fair enough. Before giving up on Hemingway though, consider reading his best work: The Sun Also Rises. It's the book that made him famous. It's nothing like FWTBT.
Jaja, well, thanks! I'll do that as soon as I get that novel. Greetings! PD. by the way? Have you read LOOK AT THE HARLEQUINS? I recommend you that amazing novel, it's just remarkable!
He is a less eloquent speaker than I expected. Maybe because he is trying to think of interesting phrases and words while simultaneously continuing the flow of dialogue.
@carolingianguy And what did you write, besides forum postings? Share an essay, or an article, so we can discuss and grade it here. I love how it 's always a million critics per one talented writer.
writers generally don't like to be asked what their book is trying to say. They will often tell you that everything it is trying to say is in the book.
Nabokov doesnt have anything to say in his books.
But dumbasses refuse to read what we write. Sponfeed them till you die!!!
Not today. Too many writers today like to say their books said something about some sort of social justice, oppression or some sort of identity politics. It prevent them from creating unique characters and original plots, since it felt more like reading fanfictions or blog posts newspaper. When I was growing up, writers try create a story, and how you relate the story to the real world is the message.
@@williamdrouin8063 He did but the moralizing and preaching is not the point. Like Poe, he kept the themes underneath the surface of the currents.
Nabokov's philosophy was that books were meant to be hedonistic experiences. He hated writers like Victor Hugo who tried to use their books to spur political/social movements.
It flies in the face of the current postmodern belief that all art is meant to influence society. Nabokov's other masterpiece, Pale Fire, similarly pokes fun at how people misunderstand his art for the sake of their own interests
Nabokov is indeed uncomfortable in this interview, but mostly due to his personal fear that he would be misinterpreted, not from trying to hide some nymphet obsession. Nabokov is infatuated with butterflies and language, not nymphets; that Humbert is a pedophile is just an aspect of the novel that Nabokov came up with in a fit of artistic inspiration and planning. This is like saying that since Charles Kinbote is a stalker, liar, and thief in Pale Fire, then Nabokov must be too.
@Christina R I guess he wanted to show people that monsters are real life people.
No comment in this thread for 7 years. And we both comment in it on same day.
@Christina R It is possible that someone close to him was a pedophile which inspired him into something like this.
Frankly speaking, my best friend is a pedophile (he is 17 and likes preteen boys and girls). He himself sometimes feel guilty about his emotions but he can't help it. I try to talk him out of it and if the situation gets worse I will surely recommand him to a psychiatrist. So see I can get inspired to write about this, from their viewpoint, as I got to know things from him.
@Christina R Btw this video wasn't on the youtube recommendation. I just finished reading lolita today so was researching a bit
@Christina R I was reading 3 books at once (lolita, Jane Eyre and Dracula) so it took me somewhat 2 weeks to finish.
@Christina R Yeah sitting here in quarantine tons of free time. True dracula is depressing but I really liked Bram Stoker's style, that he used letter, journals to tell the story.
I think he's a first-rate writer and unfairly criticized. Because of what I've heard and read about Lolita, I thought it'd be a second-rate popular fiction novel but it turned out to be, along with Pale Fire, among the best and most beautiful novels I've ever read.
Lolita is so good I started to re-read immediately after finishing it.
@deepasanyal3989 it's a novel about a pedophile. You can paint it however you want but it's pedophilia.
Someone who equates a character with his creator has never learned to read correctly.
Yes. Thank you.
It is nothing but bibliographical fallacy.
Lolita is hebephilia disguised as high art. I mean he wrote a novella titled The Enchantress which was a precursor to Lolita which was pretty straight forward novella about a middle aged man who was a sexual predator without all the artsy literary stuff. Look at how he fumbles on his words from 4:35 onwards trying to make it seem like the books are really inspired by baboons and some abstract artsy idea as if it makes logical sense to make it about an old dude who has the hots for young girls LOL. Wake up people.
@@OMAR-vq3yb Seems like you know quite a bit about the subject without ever actually reading his novels. Interesting, OMAR...
@@OMAR-vq3yb that would be based if true, sadly it isn't
The smirk on Nabokov's face when that guy said "You can't trust a creative writer to say what he has done."
VII "that guy" is actually quite an accomplished writer himself. Lionel Trilling. Check him out.
I love how real and genuinely engaged these reviewers are. You don't see that in modern times.
Political correctness destroyed intellectual discussion. We live
the an era of Inquisition
I'd like to say 'thank you' for uploading this piece of footage. Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov is (in my opinion) the master of prose. A writer whose talent continues to be unparalleled.
Q: "How are you different from Humbert Humbert?" A: "Humbert doesn't know a hawk from a handbag - I do."
what's hawk from a handbag?
you’re replying to a 9 year old comment. You certainly can’t tell hawk from handbag.
@@anshulmanapure1980 the comment is very old so I’ll answer, he’s saying Humbert is delusional and cannot be trusted with his accounts. So if he saw a hawk, he could think it was a handbag and vice versa
Nabokov was an absolutely amazing man. More than just his works of literature, all facets of his intelligence are incredibly astounding.
When Nabokov said “I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child” I thought he was being modest. The remark was a much more honest self-assessment than I thought.
I just listened to the audio book version of Lolita and it's so perfectly read by Jeremy Irons--he captures the nuances of Humbert Humbert's personality impeccably, and his reading of the poetic sequences will break your heart.
Before overpraising Jeremy Irons (who landed the Humbert role in such an awful remake ) You should hear Vladimir reading the final confrontation with Quilty. It'll blow your hair back !
Probably the most beautifully written book I have ever read.
I haven’t read the book yet, but clearly by the fact that I’m here, my curiosity is obviously growing.
What made it the most beautifully written book to your estimation?
@@jacobtaylor2850 Nabokov has said that it was an experiment with the English language and all it's possibilities. He was taught English by a governess. I picked the book up (a battered Corgi paperback) from a second-hand shop. I read the first two paragraphs and was hooked. Nabokov doesn't miss a trick with the prose. It's exquisite, brutal, tender and erotic. Of course, the subject is taboo, but there is not one sentence which is sordid and filthy. We read the story of a man and his obsession (a girl who reminds him of his childhood sweetheart who died young). It's subtle, funny, sad. Humbert's frustration and paranoia pervade the tale with a lyricism which Nabokov excells at. When asked, the author actually believed that love could exist this way. He certainly demonstrated this without resorting to filth. Enjoy, my friend. Thank you for your reply.
“The sob in the spine” Nabokov was a genius.
Perhaps the best, a real master of english.
Pele Gacinovic prose
@@paytonking4673
Makes too many solecisms.
@@kelman727 Respectfully, Nabokov's "solecisms" contribute intentionally to the texture and tone of the novel. Hiding behind strict grammatical constructs as such is an irrational way to approach novels that purposefully eschew them. (Correlary: The statement "I don't like James Joyce because of his solecisms" would be absolutely bull-headed.)
Ironic since he's Russian
He's so charismatic, he uses the most beautiful words conceivable
As Trilling says "we cannot trust the creative artist to say what he has done"--Nabokov is smirking in the background as he takes in this most welcome compliment. He thought of himself as an "enchanter" above all else.
Finally! I get to hear my favorite writer speak! I love how even his story of inspiration for the book is fiction. Thank you so much for finding this and uploading it.
Lolita is a difficult subject very well handled - the novel is satisfyingly entertaining to read thanks to its humour.
Vladimir was a genius. Both Lolita and Pale Fire are masterpieces. Good stuff 👌
Nabokov was very nostalgic about his childhood and he wrote a lot about it, you can see how much did he missed that part of his life. So I assume, he did associate himself with Humbert, but not as an old man , but that young boy he was when he met his first love during his stay in the family house in the country All the story is about his dreams to return to those emotions during his childhood and adolescence , his first expreince of love and sex.
I was brought here after listening to "Don't stand so close to me"☺.
And now I know what they mean by "the Lolita Express".
Read Dostoyevsky because he is brilliant. He is different from Nabokov in that he doesn't use language poetically, he isn't stylistically that good a writer you could say, but his stories as incredible, absolutely incredible. Start with "Notes From Underground", it's nice and short and sums up Dostoyevsky's style quite well. Or Crime and Punishment for that matter.
15 years later. And I am discovering a new writer, book, and hobby. Thank you.
Why do they randomly get up and move to the other table?
J Kane more comfortable on the couch
Also tea was on the coffee table
Sometimes little farts make you uncomfortable; a walk slows them out.
@Omar Q Best comment
This comment killed me. Thank you
I've always been in love with Nabokov's "Pale Fire".
I'm not sure I've ever found such a gorgeously poetic book so hilarious...and the story is just that (at least to me), absurdly funny.
Then, of course, there are many shades of gray retained within the experimental novel. John Shade's name should be telling enough.
If you can't tell already, I'm a big Nabokov fan :P
Genius writer. Absolute genius
Anyone who thinks that Nabokov and Humbert Humbert are "like minded" are being absolutely absurd. And 90% of the comments under this video are simply idiotic. Most seem to be from Americans trying to find a scandal in here somewhere (as usual).
You see the way Lolita is written, it really does feel like the author has purposely created Humbert Humbert to be absolutely as un-relatable as possible, especially in how he pseudo-rationalises everything he does and lies to the reader. The way Lolita is portrayed in the book as being simply the impression Humbert Humbert has of her. Nabokov is so detached and artistically minded with respect to main character in this way, that he simply couldn't have been on Humbert Humbert's side. The fact that he's crafted such an unlikeable character, again, _on purpose,_ shows Nabokov obviously wasn't just trying to... whatever you think he was trying to do if he was himself a pedophile. The work ceases to make any sense if Nabokov were actually sympathetic to Humbert Humbert. He does his damnedest to make sure the reader isn't. Yes he did plenty of research on pedophiles for the creation of his main character, but in the form of academic case studies from psychological journals. Some commentators will actually attempt the pathetic joke: "oh yeah, 'research,' I bet he really enjoyed doing all of that 'research' haha wink wink." And here I must simply ask, do you really think he was sitting there with an academic journal and secretly hiding, I don't know, Nymphet Weekly, behind it like in a cartoon? He took about as much interest in the experts who studied the predator's minds as he did in the predators themselves, but there is no evidence, anywhere, that he took an interest in 'nymphets.'
Nabokov was interested, as can be seen throughout his work, in the minds of other people, especially when they were so very different from his own. The subjective experiences of those whom most of us would view as being alien. Distorted realities through distorted eyes. To my own mind, art is about the communication of the subjective experience. Most authors do this by crafting a narrator who views the world much like they themselves do. You can tell when this is happening. Read Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, David Foster Wallace, Proust, all wrote in such a way that their work gives one insight into how they saw the world, and reflects on their understanding of what art _should be_ (I myself have expressed my own views on what I think art _should be_ just now). Incidentally, most praise or criticism directed at these authors stems from the reader either agreeing or disagreeing with their view of the world, or from the agree/disagree-ment of the reader with the author's version of the 'artistic ideal.' Nabokov's own artistic ideal was to make the author as invisible as possible. If you look at his literary criticisms, you will see that he 'detests' when the author projects their views onto the characters, or tries to use them as mere mouthpieces to force a moral or political message. This is why he didn't like most of Tolstoy, but for War and Peace, Anna Karenina and The Death of Ivan Ilyich, which he appreciated because they didn't try to push a Christian narrative as with Tolstoy's other works, but were much more about the characters and their humanity. He disliked all of Dostoevsky for the same reason, as everything he wrote was trying to convey a pro-Christianity message in one way or another- his work literally revolved around it.
Nabokov on the other hand, wanted to explore new ground with art. How's about we don't merely try to solve the riddle of [our] humanity with art, but simply highlight that [our] humanity is more of a riddle than even we ourselves would ever want to come to terms with. This is that "tingle" or "sob" in the spine as it were.
American puritans -- nuff said. Always on the lookout for people having fun...
Lolita was not Nabokov's only exploration of that topic. The aesthetic beauty of nymphets was a theme he returned to again and again. As dedicated Nabokovian Martin Amis put it, "he simply enjoyed the topic too much."
Either way, he's the greatest writer in modern times.
Amazingly said.
Yes. ❤️
❤
such an honest chat about the best novel of the 20th century
His English is not that bad. I think he was more awkward appearing on camera, having to give quick replies to an interviewer's questions. That explains the note cards. Look up Keroac on Steve Allen. He also appears to be incredibly shy. We have to understand that back in the 50's, television was just starting up. Having cameras shoved in your face was anxiety-inducing to people not used to such public exposure Not the same now, where we've embraced the Orwellian Eye a little more.
My most personal favourite writer! Brilliant in all aspects. I loved "LOLITA", but there are also his magical epic-novel "ADA OR ARDOR", his magnificent and thrilling "PALE FIRE" or his beautifuly cruel "DESPAIR" and "CAMERA OBSCURA".
The only novel I've not read yet is "TRANSPARENT THINGS". How is it?
His short-stories are aslo something out of this world.
Lolita has been my favorite novel since I first read it in high school, and it never occurred to me that until now I'd never even seen a picture of him. I confess I'd imagined him being a bit more dashing in the looks department, but the wit is just as I'd pictured it.
Genius. I've read many other books he wrote and they are masterpieces specially Pale fire and Camera obscura (Laughter in the dark).
No better master of words than Nabokov.
The Great Master!!!!!!!
In other words: ''Do you like little girls?'' Nabokov: I like birds more than does Humbert Humbert.
i'm on chapter 16 of the first part and I must say this novel is AWESOME! THe lyrical style is engaging and after having read 2 so-called classics that were complete garbage (Catch 22 and For Whom the Bell Tolls) back to back this was a great change. Both novels were a complete bore, I counted the pages between chapters and was paralyzed by fear when the number rose above 7 with Nabokov I feel the chapters go quickly, and not just because they're mostly short.
Yeah, I can't stand Hemingway...too dry and boring.
He's reading his answers from a card :(
All his books are so brilliant :)
I love his smile at 2:48 - it.s the answer to the book.
Ah, the art of saying a lot without saying anything.
Much is missed in Lolita
without the annotated version. 🦋
Am curious whether anyone recalls Lionel Trilling out of Columbia U ?? Given writers' general disdain for critics, it is telling of Trilling's stature that VN sits on par with him… btw On SoundCloud fans can listen to Nabokov reading the final scene with Quilty and it's quite a sendup of that "semi-animated subhuman trickster" You'll never be able to hear the audiobook reading by Jeremy Irons without a longing that it were VN speaking.
@ObeyTheSloth He was a writer, not a public speaker. As he himself stated, "I think like a genius, I write like a distinguished author, and I speak like a child". Therefore perhaps he used those cue cards. : ) I wish I could hear him speaking Russian, his native language... As for touching hearts, he wakes up imagination in his readers; many people lack imagination, while sentimentality is not that rare.
This is amazing footage.
Nabokov's work is dessert to my reads.
Great artists are the conscience of society.
VN explains in Strong Opinions, a book collection of interviews, that spontaneous eloquence seems to him miraculous, and that in interviews (many of them? most?) he is in fact reading from note cards, and indeed I believe some pages can be discerned in the clip!
Not many readers are as smart as N
And Humbert to be able to work out
The intricacies and clues of this tale.
At the end of the day. the reader's left
With the text as writer and character
Vanish into the text, but each reading
Sees them with more focus and attention.
This Lolita must be read many times.
Thank you so much for this.
2:44 Wise words. This is true of all creatives.
wow, terrific, intense and insightful
Indeed, I've noticed that, in the modern literary canon, Pale Fire seems to have caught a phantom wind, pushing it retrospectively toward the front of a lot of critics lists.
from William F. Buckley's Eulogy - He reminisces about his declination of my bid to go on Firing Line. It would have taken me two weeks of preparation, he says almost proudly, reminding me of his well-known rule against improvising. Every word he ever spoke before an audience had been written out and memorized, he assured me-isn’t that right, Vera? Well no, he would answer questions in class extemporaneously. Well obviously! He laughed. He could hardly program his students to ask questions to which he had the answers prepared! I demur: His extemporaneous style is fine, just fine; ah, he says, but before an audience, or before one of those . . . television . . . cameras, he would freeze. He ordered a brandy, and in a few minutes we rose, and he and Vera and I walked ever so slowly to the doors. “As long as Western civilization survives,” Christopher Lehmann-Haupt wrote in the Times last Tuesday, “his reputation is safe. Indeed, he will probably emerge as one of the greatest artists our century has produced.” I said goodbye warmly, embracing Vera, taking his hand, knowing that probably I would never see again-never mind the artist-this wonderful human being.
Армянин и славянка
. 😊😊😊😊😊
Я не имею средств наличных,
машин, костюмов и домов,
хотя мой вид вполне приличный,
прочёл три дюжины томов.
Я полон сотнями стараний,
сплетеньем мыслей и острот,
исканьем между осознаний
и кладом внутренних красот.
Я меховой, как пёс безродный,
разумный, тёплый и простой,
и справедливый, беспородный
с татуированной средой.
Так вот позвольте, мисс благая,
без роз, колье, богатств иных,
средь рестораций, улиц мая
Вас пригласить в мир грёз моих!
trilling & nabokov in the same room. What a scene!!!
Can you imagine CBS (or any network) putting on a show like this today? We need more intelligent TV like this.
He should have gone on Firing Line. He was a huge Bill Buckley fan.
@why760nitro "a book about child molestation" (I am using the exact words you used to describe this book) can help in many ways rather than just being a work of arts. first thing first, it's about knowing and understanding the thoughts going on in Humbert Humbert's mind, because it is extra hard when you try to know how people like him view the world and what leads them to do what they do. Secondly, anything can be 'fine literature' if it can pull out the core of a human being, & of a situation.
Interesting you should say that, I just finished Lolita about a week ago and read Nabokov's feeling about didactic literature and how he felt literature should not impart a moral but rather it should be art to be enjoyed (paraphrasing a lot) I have to say though that i can enjoy both types of literature. I might give Dostoevsky a shot anyway.
As much as I have enjoyed VN's work the only novel that verged on provoking any kind of 'sob in the spine' was Pnin, his most finely drawn and sympathetic character. There is not a single character in 'Lolita' [ and I agree w/ Bloom that VN too often indulged in caricature] that does not verge on the pathetic. It is an especially savage little monster executed with a jewelers eye and misanthropes temperment.
The 1950s ROCKED!!
My paperback version is 250 pages even. It reads quickly. The brothers karamazov I read in high school but it was over my head then. i need to go back and reread that one myself.
This footage is a treasure, a film within a film, or a trial within a trial, and at times it seems that just outside this room a firing squad awaits.
наш великий!
This was when he was in his 50s. There are quite a few pictures of him from his youth and early adulthood that are more 'dashing.'
i bought the book today and i am very exicited to read it!
Stephen King actually unalived hundreds of people, that's why he writes so realistically about unaliving people. Instead of discussing Nab's book, let's talk about how I was touched when I was a child. My story is soooo much more important than anything else in this comment section.
3:28 I guess this good reader was Vera.
Funny how Wladimir tried to escape from talking about "touching hearts and minds" and "messages". How desperatehe he was rushing to the salutary sofa, but...the attempt feailed, the refugee was caught up and totured by way of listening to the bookenist opinion on "Lolita". After such a cruel punishment Nabokov gave up, and finally began to explain the aim of the book...
uhmfar
I am certain you are right [ and I am certain of everything].
In any event,this interview gives me a stronger resolution re my image of Pnin, his kindest offering.
Literature as a koan for moral reading. Or maybe not just moral reading, but any reading that supposes meaning, an outside meaning. I like that, good point.
Nabokov wrote a few wonderful books no one read, so he provoked the reader with the book which was controversial and won a Nobel Prize. Isn't what American culture is bazed on?
hes not american...
Nabokov never won the Nobel Prize.
@@kerilyndesiree6188 Lolita was written in America by an American citizen.
Pierre Berton with his trademark bow-tie is the interviewer. A great personality in his own write. There was a time when the CBC was the intended medium. I would like to think that McLuhan was influenced by CBC content when he first wrote about the message. You don't see anything like this nowadays. Oh, and Nabokov is none too shabby either.
It's also funny because Nabokov's voice totally changes when he speaks in a different language
2:13 Can someone tell me the reason why Nabokov moved from his position into another? Very intriguing…
I found Pale Fire [ which I failed to finish] snarky, derivative and endlessly self congratulating. And the unfinshing finshed me re reading anything further. So, I cling to the older stuff; Laughter in the Dark, King, Queen , Knave, The Defense, Pnin and Lolita.
VN is, all in all, something of sadistic pupeteer, his well measured but florid style disguising his fear of sleep and dreaming.
Yes. Derivative of everything that came after.
Fascinating interview! The interviewer clearly wants to get VN to own up to something which is not there for VN to own up to. No wonder he disliked interviews in later life.
I was expecting "thick Russian accent"...not a goofy accent.
Why would expect "thick" accent of someone who, as I'm sure you're aware, illustrates mastery over the English language in his prose?
"goofy accent" -- Cambridge grad (1919-1923) quadralingual
he had an english tutor growing up and english was spoken often in his household
Speaking as someone who learned English as a second language at an early age, it's very easy to lose any accent (though never entirely) through linguistic immersion. Keep in mind that Nabokov had already been living in the USA for a while at the time this interview was made.
He was born into a wealthy Russian aristocratic family before the Revolution and learned to read and speak English and French when he was a young boy. He learned all his languages simultaneously, more or less.
I am fascinated and disturbed by the anecdote Mr. Nabokov recounts at the end of this video about the artist-ape in the Jardin des Plantes. Does anyone know if the newspaper article Nabokov read can be found?
Pierre Berton (the host) conducted the interview well
Maybe I have read too many very graphic sex novels, but imo Lolita does not come close in shock value to many other books I've read. Actually, I think I can take out the subject matter and read it as if it were any other kind of book, any other situation. It could be anything. It could be a love story about two heterosexual rhinosori, we don't know. The point is we appreciate the creativity and brilliance of the writer, of the artist.
Lolita is a devious and snarky delight I look forward to reading again. But the greatest writer of English prose since Shakespeare? Nabokov is a brilliant stylist, but all too often his characters are deliberate caricatures, verging on the apsychological [ PNIN stands as an exception], pinned to the page, never to surprise but always to satisfy the authors imperious misanthropy. He is, in short, an elegant sadist.
It is true that he was probably reading from notecards, or that he'd memorized his responses. He admits this in Strong Opinions; he calls spontaneous eloquence a miracle and admits that he used notecards in some filmed interview.
Anyway, the story about the poor creature drawing its cage is completely invented by VN!
Finally, this was the first time I'd heard his voice. whaaat a playa. I was expecting a deeper, richer, more intimidating voice, though..
Pish Posh. Lolita is a cautionary story that is relevant to the course of every love affair, and every marriage; try reading it with both hands next time, Skitzo.
Jajaja well, I understand you perfectly, so is mine. ADA OR ARDOR is probably the most perfect novel I've ever read. ADA and PALE FIRE, actually.
You got excellent tastes, I can tell. Greeting! :)
GENIUS!
Lionel Trilling who mistook this work as a love story, totally missing the overwhelming kill count, gets more than one sideways look of suspicion from Nabokov.
2:10 So Nabokov just gets up and moves to the couch. C'mon boys, let's get cozy on the setee. Staging for tv shows was still in it's infancy. Newscasters in the early 50s used to get up, walk around, sit on the front desk and use pointers on maps all while reading the news.
I picked up on the fact that this show was Canadian even before I noticed that it was CBC--the host said "aboot."
Interesting
A touch of the Philip Larkin about him
Well...I have an EXTREMELY discerning ear (have been the control for the audio component of several neural network studies) but I'll consider your comment. FWIW, I recently took great satisfaction in nailing the fact that Glenn Ford is Canadian (I believe the tip-off was "out"). I guess he should've used Lorne Greene's vocal coach.
@GnawOnAaBrick Well, he did learn it in his childhood, but certainly he didn't write in it for many years.
The other guy is Lionel Trilling, an important critic.
Intriguing summary.
I read Lolita as an indictment against post-war American shallowness. NV was right in his Humbertian assessment of this country. Look at it today. See Lolita ambling about the isles of Walmart!
Check out Jarmusch's homage to Nabokov (and maybe also to Kubrick) in "Broken Flowers".
Please. If you compare his performance here to how articulate he liked to be, and how articulate he was in print, you can clearly see why he stopped doing TV interviews as soon as he could get away with it.
The notion that all geniuses are criminals is certainly provocative [ and I provided a short list of unashamed 'meanies'] and I suppose their contempt for the various dominant cultures and subcultures of their respective eras was useful for obvious reasons but that said I also believe there are many genuises who would not have been able to produce any kind of worthwhile art had they not been able to silence their more monstrous aspects.
Fair enough. Before giving up on Hemingway though, consider reading his best work: The Sun Also Rises. It's the book that made him famous. It's nothing like FWTBT.
Right, start with that and The Old Man and the Sea. You may not love Hemingway, and I don't, but he's not an utter waste of time.
Jaja, well, thanks! I'll do that as soon as I get that novel. Greetings!
PD. by the way? Have you read LOOK AT THE HARLEQUINS? I recommend you that amazing novel, it's just remarkable!
He reminds me of one of Peter Seller's characters in the movie.
well....this is ridiculously cool.
He is a less eloquent speaker than I expected. Maybe because he is trying to think of interesting phrases and words while simultaneously continuing the flow of dialogue.
I thought he did quite well in this interview considering English is not his native tongue.
@carolingianguy And what did you write, besides forum postings? Share an essay, or an article, so we can discuss and grade it here. I love how it 's always a million critics per one talented writer.