Subject
Fwd: Re: ParaNabokoviana. Lolita
From
Date
Body
I've decided to reply, as we get such a lot of links
to these vague, uninformed references to _Lolita_ on
this listserv. As I'm certain we all know, Humbert
isn't attracted to the type of womanly image described
in this article; his predilection for nymphets is
supposedly based on the indelible memory of the
"prepubscent" Annabel Lee in her very girlish frocks.
Evening gowns and makeup would _not_ have charmed him.
I know I'm just preaching to the choir here.
File this one under "Misapprehensions of _Lolita_ in
Popular Culture.
Best,
Alyssa Pelish
--- "Donald B. Johnson" <chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu> wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from spklein52@hotmail.com
> -----
> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 10:37:44 -0400
> From: "Sandy P. Klein" <spklein52@hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: SPKlein52@HotMail.com
> Subject: older than Nabokovs Lolita ...
> To: SPKlein52@HotMail.com
>
>
>
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050814/asp/look/story_5094874.asp[2]
>
http://ww1.mid-day.com/columns/amit_roy/2005/august/116263.htm[3]
>
> Royal row over pin-up
> Mid-Day Mumbai, India & Calcutta Telegraph, India -
> 14 August 2005
> ... Thus begins VLADIMIR NABOKOVs 1955 novel,
> Lolita, about an older
> mans passion for an under-age girl the kind of
> subject Bollywood
> dare not touch. ...
>
> The Duchess and her daughter in the Daily
> Mail
>
> Row over royal pin-up
>
> By: Amit Roy
> August 14, 2005
>
> London: "Lolita, light of my life, fire of
> my loins. My sin, my
> soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip
> of three steps
> down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo.
> Lee. Ta.
>
> She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning,
> standing four feet ten in one
> sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at
> school. Dolores on the
> dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita.
>
> Thus begins Vladimir Nabokovs 1955 novel,
> Lolita, about an older
> mans passion for an under-age girl the kind of
> subject Bollywood
> dare not touch. The novel is worth reading to obtain
> a better
> understanding of why Lolita-ish photographs of the
> Queens
> granddaughter, Princess Beatrice, in the glossy
> magazine, Tatler,
> have aroused admiration and uneasiness in equal
> measure.
>
> Beatrice, who is the daughter of Prince
> Andrew and his ex-wife, the
> Duchess of York, was 16 when the photographs were
> taken for the cover
> story, Royal sweetheart. She has just turned 17.
>
> Beatrice agreed to pose for the pictures and
> give her first
> interview to Tatler in return for a donation to a
> charity which tries
> to help children with dyslexia from which she
> herself suffers.
>
> But should her mother, who has been involved
> in many a scandal in
> the past, have allowed her daughter be to packaged
> in so alluring a
> manner?
>
> Anything you can do, Mum, was the
> perceptive headline in the Daily
> Mail.
>
> A Scottish newspaper remarkably protested at
> her early
> sexualisation: The pose is sexy and glamorous. The
> soulful eyes of a
> beautiful teenager smoulder seductively as her head
> turns over her
> bare shoulder to look out from a glossy magazine
> cover, her chestnut
> hair cascading in wild curls down to a siren-red
> silky evening gown.
> Its an image that would sell thousands of copies of
> the sort of
> gentlemens publications that occupy the upper
> shelves at the
> newsagents.
>
> At 17, Beatrice can claim to be a young
> adult, a good five years
> older than Nabokovs Lolita or four years senior to
> Shakespeares
> Juliet.
>
> However, others have pointed out that if
> Beatrice were now to be
> hounded by tabloid photographers, neither she nor
> her mother could
> make a case for invasion of privacy.
>
> amitr@mid-day.com[4]
> [5]
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.telegraphindia.com/
> [2]
>
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050814/asp/look/story_5094874.asp
> [3]
>
http://ww1.mid-day.com/columns/amit_roy/2005/august/116263.htm
> [4] mailto:amitr@mid-day.com
> [5] http://ww1.mid-day.com/
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----- End forwarded message -----
to these vague, uninformed references to _Lolita_ on
this listserv. As I'm certain we all know, Humbert
isn't attracted to the type of womanly image described
in this article; his predilection for nymphets is
supposedly based on the indelible memory of the
"prepubscent" Annabel Lee in her very girlish frocks.
Evening gowns and makeup would _not_ have charmed him.
I know I'm just preaching to the choir here.
File this one under "Misapprehensions of _Lolita_ in
Popular Culture.
Best,
Alyssa Pelish
--- "Donald B. Johnson" <chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu> wrote:
> ----- Forwarded message from spklein52@hotmail.com
> -----
> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 10:37:44 -0400
> From: "Sandy P. Klein" <spklein52@hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: SPKlein52@HotMail.com
> Subject: older than Nabokovs Lolita ...
> To: SPKlein52@HotMail.com
>
>
>
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050814/asp/look/story_5094874.asp[2]
>
http://ww1.mid-day.com/columns/amit_roy/2005/august/116263.htm[3]
>
> Royal row over pin-up
> Mid-Day Mumbai, India & Calcutta Telegraph, India -
> 14 August 2005
> ... Thus begins VLADIMIR NABOKOVs 1955 novel,
> Lolita, about an older
> mans passion for an under-age girl the kind of
> subject Bollywood
> dare not touch. ...
>
> The Duchess and her daughter in the Daily
>
> Row over royal pin-up
>
> By: Amit Roy
> August 14, 2005
>
> London: "Lolita, light of my life, fire of
> my loins. My sin, my
> soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip
> of three steps
> down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo.
> Lee. Ta.
>
> She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning,
> standing four feet ten in one
> sock. She was Lola in slacks. She was Dolly at
> school. Dolores on the
> dotted line. But in my arms she was always Lolita.
>
> Thus begins Vladimir Nabokovs 1955 novel,
> Lolita, about an older
> mans passion for an under-age girl the kind of
> subject Bollywood
> dare not touch. The novel is worth reading to obtain
> a better
> understanding of why Lolita-ish photographs of the
> Queens
> granddaughter, Princess Beatrice, in the glossy
> magazine, Tatler,
> have aroused admiration and uneasiness in equal
> measure.
>
> Beatrice, who is the daughter of Prince
> Andrew and his ex-wife, the
> Duchess of York, was 16 when the photographs were
> taken for the cover
> story, Royal sweetheart. She has just turned 17.
>
> Beatrice agreed to pose for the pictures and
> give her first
> interview to Tatler in return for a donation to a
> charity which tries
> to help children with dyslexia from which she
> herself suffers.
>
> But should her mother, who has been involved
> in many a scandal in
> the past, have allowed her daughter be to packaged
> in so alluring a
> manner?
>
> Anything you can do, Mum, was the
> perceptive headline in the Daily
> Mail.
>
> A Scottish newspaper remarkably protested at
> her early
> sexualisation: The pose is sexy and glamorous. The
> soulful eyes of a
> beautiful teenager smoulder seductively as her head
> turns over her
> bare shoulder to look out from a glossy magazine
> cover, her chestnut
> hair cascading in wild curls down to a siren-red
> silky evening gown.
> Its an image that would sell thousands of copies of
> the sort of
> gentlemens publications that occupy the upper
> shelves at the
> newsagents.
>
> At 17, Beatrice can claim to be a young
> adult, a good five years
> older than Nabokovs Lolita or four years senior to
> Shakespeares
> Juliet.
>
> However, others have pointed out that if
> Beatrice were now to be
> hounded by tabloid photographers, neither she nor
> her mother could
> make a case for invasion of privacy.
>
> amitr@mid-day.com[4]
> [5]
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.telegraphindia.com/
> [2]
>
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050814/asp/look/story_5094874.asp
> [3]
>
http://ww1.mid-day.com/columns/amit_roy/2005/august/116263.htm
> [4] mailto:amitr@mid-day.com
> [5] http://ww1.mid-day.com/
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----- End forwarded message -----