Dorian's Yellow Book

here’s a question: if vladimir nabokov’s “lolita” is truly the psychological portrait of a messed up dude and not the girl — let alone a sexualized little girl, as all of the sexualization happens inside humbert humbert’s head — then why do all the covers focus on a girl, and usually a sexy aspect of a girl, usually quite young, and none of them feature a portrait of humbert humbert?

here are nabokov’s original instructions for the book cover:

I want pure colors, melting clouds, accurately drawn details, a sunburst above a receding road with the light reflected in furrows and ruts, after rain. And no girls. … Who would be capable of creating a romantic, delicately drawn, non-Freudian and non-juvenile, picture for LOLITA (a dissolving remoteness, a soft American landscape, a nostalgic highway—that sort of thing)? There is one subject which I am emphatically opposed to: any kind of representation of a little girl.

and yet, the representations of the sexy little girl abound.

i became driven by curiousity. why did this happen? why is this happening?

i am not alone — there’s a book about this, with several essays and artists’ conceptions about the politics and problems of representation surrounding the covers of “lolita.” this new yorker article gives a summary of the book and its ideas, and interviews one of the editors:

Many of the covers guilty of misrepresenting Lolita as a teen seductress feature images from Hollywood movie adaptations of the book— Kubrick’s 1962 version, starring Sue Lyon, and Adrian Lyne’s 1997 one. Are those films primarily to blame for the sexualization of Lolita? As is argued in several of the book’s essays, the promotional image of Sue Lyon in the heart-shaped sunglasses, taken by photographer Bert Stern, is easily the most significant culprit in this regard, much more so than the Kubrick film itself (significantly, neither the sunglasses nor the lollipop ever appears in the film), or the later film by Adrian Lyne. Once this image became associated with “Lolita”—and it’s important to remember that, in the film, Lolita is sixteen years old, not twelve—it really didn’t matter that it was a terribly inaccurate portrait. It became the image of Lolita, and it was ubiquitous. There are other factors that have contributed to the incorrect reading, from the book’s initial publication in Olympia Press’s Traveller’s Series (essentially, a collection of dirty books), to Kubrick’s startlingly unfaithful adaptation. At the heart of all of this seems to be the desire to make the sexual aspect of the novel more palatable.

here’s a couple of kubrick inspired covers:

which very well could have, after tremendous sales, have influenced the following covers:

…straying so far from the intention of nabokov that the phenomenon begins to look more like the symptom of something larger, something sicker.

after a lot of researching covers, it was here, in this sampling of concept covers for the book about the lolita covers, that i found an image that best represents the story to me:

[art by linn olofsdotter]

but why aren’t all the covers like that? even the ones published by “legitimate” publishing companies, with full academic credentials, with no intended connection to the film; surely they must have read nabokov’s instructions for the cover. and yet, look at the top row of lolita covers: all legitimate publishing companies, not prone to smut. and yet.

my conclusion is that the lolita complex existed before “lolita” (and of course it did) — a patriarchal society is essentially operating with the same delusions of humbert humbert. nabokov did not produce the sexy girl covers of lolita, and kubrick had only the smallest hand in it. it was what people desired, requested and bought. the image of the sexy girl sells; intrigues; gets the hands on the books.

as elizabeth janeway said in her review in the new york review of books: “Humbert is every man who is driven by desire, wanting his Lolita so badly that it never occurs to him to consider her as a human being, or as anything but a dream-figment made flesh.”

isn’t that our media as a whole? our culture as a whole?

STUDY ADVICE: 5 Tips for Reading Modernist Literature

First things first: no, you are not an idiot.

The modernist literary movement tossed realism out the window and replaced it with sensory impressions and stream-of-consciousness narration in an attempt to “make it new,” as Ezra Pound put it. After all, post-WWI life could not be expressed through the old traditional forms. The result was a way of writing that confuses many readers and terrifies university students the second they see The Wasteland on their reading list, and with good reason: modernist literature is difficult. It is often dense, fragmented, full of obscure allusions, and thus asks more from the reader than your average novel. Tackling a modernist work demands commitment, patience, and attention, but if you are willing to put in the work, you can discover a whole new world way of writing unlike anything you have ever seen before.

As someone who took a very long time to come to appreciate the movement (we’re talking years here), I know how daunting a book like To The Lighthouse can be. That’s why I have put together a list of five simple tips to get you going.

Flannery O’Connor's  unambiguous opinion of Ayn Rand in a 1960 letter to a friend. 

Pair with O’Connor on why the grotesque appeals to us and the difference between religion and faith.

Brent Weeks (via victoriousvocabulary)

BAM

The Strokes » Soma

July 16, 1951: The Catcher in the Rye is Published

On this day in 1951, J.D. Salinger’s novel, The Catcher in the Rye, was published. The novel tells the story of 16-year-old Holden Caulfield, a troubled character who challenged 1950s conformity, much like Salinger himself.

Due to its somewhat rebellious tone, Salinger’s work has been linked to issues of controversy and censorship.  Even so, over 60 years later, The Catcher in the Rye has sold over 65 million copies and continues to sell an additional 500,000 each year.

Learn about the novel’s path to publication with American Masters’ J. D. Salinger infographic.

So The Enigma of Amigara Fault has been getting really popular recently and I’d thought I’d show where fans could read more of Junji Ito’s works

The best place to get everything you need is Junji Ito Index but here’s a few recommended links

Tomie (personal favorite) A girl named Tomie have boys fall in love with her. Yet eventually they become too obsessed and murder her. Countless times Tomie comes back like new. But Why?

Uzumaki A small town in japan notices very supernatural things occurring all relating to one symbol, the spiral. Violent and disturbing things happen to this town and two teenage inhabitants try to figure it all out

Short Stories: If you don’t want to read a whole series and enjoyed a one chapter story like Amigara Fault, they check out some of his short stories

Only a few poems of the Greek poetess Sappho’s work have survived but thanks to a leading scholar’s investigation two new works have just been recovered—and gives experts hope to find more.

OH MY GOD

The #SVYALit Project: Using YA Lit to talk about sexual violence and consent in the lives of teens. Here are a few book lists and book reviews.

Because No Always Mean No, a list of books dealing with sexual assault   Take 5: Difficult books on an important topic (sexual violence) Take 5: Sexual Violence in the Life of Boys   Book Review: The Gospel of Winter by Brendan Kiely  Thinking About Boys, Sex, and Sex & Violence by Carrie Mesrobian  What Happens Next by Colleen Clayton  Plus One by Elizabeth Fama September Girls by Bennett Madison   Discussing THE S WORD by Chelsea Pitcher, a guest post by Lourdes Keochgerien 5 Reasons I Loved Faking Normal by Courtney C. Stevens Charm and Strange by Stephanie Khuen The Truth About Alice by Jennifer Mathieu The Winner’s Curse by Marie Rutkoski Uses for Boys by Erica Loraine Scheidt Killer Instinct by S. E. Green

Live Through This by Mindi Scott Sex/Consent Positive Titles: Karen’s List Christa’s List Carrie’s List