Unbeknown to me at the time of reading, the sham foreword to Lolita is actually written by Nabokov. The foreword declares that the novel would be a classic in psychiatric circles, and so with my present knowledge of Lolita as a literary classic, the foreword seemed genuine. The foreword is somewhat sympathetic to Humbert in that it acknowledges his atrocities, but praises his ability to describe his love for Lolita.

The story is told from Humbert’s perspective, and this is made apparent by several mechanisms. Perhaps the most apparent is Humbert’s generous generous sprinkling of French, a trait that many characters comment on. He also makes casual references to future events and to names of characters that have not been introduced yet. Charlotte’s death is mentioned nonchalantly, which unnerved me with thoughts of how she would die.

Once Charlotte does die, the story quickly progresses to Humbert and Lolita meandering journey across the States. By the time Lolita is forced to be with Humbert on the road, there are sparse descriptions of Lolita’s emotional state. Humbert writes that Lolita sobs every night for she has absolutely nowhere else to go. This peek into Lolita’s condition combined with the reader’s intense awareness that they are viewing the story from Humbert’s perspective, is nightmarish.

Despite the dark storyline, Lolita is written beautifully with memorable descriptions that sometimes bring to mind prior events. Lolita’s Aztec red bathing suit is the same color as one of Trapp’s many automobiles. When Clare Quilty is shot, he rises from his chair like a “mad Nijinsky,” the same Nijinsky that Gaston has an image of in his attic. If you flipped to a random page, you would certainly find an aesthetically appealing example of the English language:

a fire opal dissolving within a ripple-ringed pool

mock derision at mock wit

blue sulks and rosey mirths

Lolita was a laborious read for me. Every chapter, of which there are many, was filled with new words, obscure words, and made up words that I felt the need to look up; some phrases, like “diaphragmatic melting,” remain incomprehensible to me. I also do not know French, of which there is quite a bit. Even with my effortful reading, I barely remembered who Clare Quilty was when it was revealed that he was responsible for Lolita’s disappearance, which according to Humbert, “the astute reader has guessed long ago.” My response is, in Humbert’s words, “Oh Mnemosyne, sweetest and most mischievous of muses.”

Humbert, near the end of the book, mentions that Humbert is a pseudonym. This implies that in the story, he provided other pseudonyms to hotels, not pseudonyms of his pseudonym, Humbert. Other characters mistakenly called him Humbird, but these events had to have been fabricated by Humberg. Names seem so important in the book: Lolita, Dolores Haze, Dolly Schiller, Lo-lee-ta. And so the end brings a dose of uncertainty to Humbert’s narrative and a reminder that Nabokov fabricated all these levels of meta-fabrication.

Oddly, in Nabokov’s closing comments, he mentions Dolly Schiller’s death as a “special delectation” of his, but I’m quite sure this wasn’t actually described in the book. Upon looking the matter up, the only other reference to Lolita’s death is in the foreword… Nonetheless, I will remember the other various scenes that were rendered so beautifully and how Humbert was able to make transcendent his despicable desires. My thoughts on the book mirror the foreword:

How magically his singing violin can conjure up a tendresse, a compassion for Lolita that makes us entranced with the book while abhorring its author!