Ah, foray... thank you so much for posting this wonderful topic for thought. I see that for this discussion you have picked not only one of my favourite novels of all time, but, I think, one of the most powerful pieces of flat-out art ever in the history of any art form.
Nabokov's classic is far more than an introspection of 'a dirty old man's psyche', it is far more than a social commentary and satire, and it is far more than a criminologist's handbook. Ultimately, I do believe that the elements of Love and Lust are at the heart of the story, however, whether they apply to Humbert that is a matter so controversial you will always have people disagreeing with themselves, let alont others.
However, it is my opinion that Humbert does indeed 'love' Lolita, while the darkest character in the book, who is constantly written as a foreboding and disturbing presence (until his humorous demise in the end), Clare Quilty, is the man who 'lusts' after her; casting her aside the moment she refuses to go along with his perversity.
Is it a love story? I believe it's perhaps one of the greatest love story. However, people assume that his fascination with Lolita is merely because of her youth, I believe it is because 'in spite' of her youth. He begins his musing with telling us about Annabel, who, without her - he informs us - there may never have been a Lolita. Annabel was his first love, clearly, and he loved her so much so that the loss (if you remember, she dies preamturely and suddenly) was unbearable and traumatising.
'I am convinced, however, that in a certain magic and fateful way Lolita began with Annabel'. This is his prognosis. This is how he explains what followed Annabel. The infatuation with Lolita. His marriage with Mrs. Haze to get closer to her. His indirect connection with her subsequent death. His bizarre road-trip with Lolita across America. His growing jealousy as she sexually matures with 'other' boys, and his final episode in madness and murder with the destruction of Quilty. It is all because of 'Annabel'.
The difference between Annabel and Lolita, though, is the element of requitement. His love for Annabel was requited, but for Lolita it was not. 'Oh, Lolita, had YOU loved me thus!' he bursts out occasionally in between the poetic and lyrical confessions.
Another signal of his morality, and how he is no immoral creature (though some of his acts may have been immoral) is the constant reference to his guilt. He KNOWS he did wrong. He KNOWS he deserved what he got. 'You can always count on a murderer for a fancy prose style', he tells us. Nabokov's character is far from simple and guiltless, however, it is his guilt that partially redeems him, and it is the character of Annabel that explains to us that his love for Lolita was a true love, as it was born out of a desire to love another just like her. In a way, Humbert Humbert never grew up, I think he was pretty much left behind in that summer when he was in his early teens, where what happens can 'shape the life of a man forever'. This is very true. He never forgot Annabel, but looks for her in others, and hence finds Lolita.
Does he feel lust for her? Ofcourse he does. Don't tell me that love and lust don't go together, for they do, they are two sides to a coin. Atleast in a 'romantic' relationship, you need to feel physical or otherwise attraction of some sort for the person, which will help intensify the relationship, and indeed he feels a LOT of lust for her. This is where we may proceed to call him 'a dirty old man', however, I never said he was imperfect.
The distinctions, though, are to be made between him and Quilty. What does his character serve besides the excuse of a plot-device?
His character serves as a contrast. Contrast in behaviour, in the way they speak, and contrast in their feelings for Lolita. Ultimately, it is Quilty who Lolita chooses. She loves him and not Humbert, though Quilty throws her out the moment he finds out that he can't use her for his sexually perverse excercises and 'art'. Incidentally, I believe Nabokov is making some wise observations about the classification of 'art' and pornography. It would seem that his conclusion that pornography is there to exploit to a degree that is demeaning and immoral to the person, as it was to Lolita, while 'art', as is Humbert's poetry and genuine feelings for her, is a more passive and considerate progression... that does NOT constitute rape.
I do not believe that she was raped at all. He never raped her, though many times he probably felt like doing it. And, perhaps, he did rape her in 'other' ways. He deprived her of company of her own age, and when she did get some he grew insanely jealous. He practically kidnapped (though she never really objected) her from her home and education, and abused the position of 'parent' and 'father'. He played the 'father' role to get the upper hand, but played the role of the lover at night so he could get what he wanted. However, he did not rape her. Any physical act was done willingly out of her own accord. Plus, there is also the fact that she was NOT a virgin when she made love to him. The girl's sexual maturity had commenced long before he even set eyes on her. She flirted, she toyed, she tortured him - never thinking or knowing how her actions were affecting him so deeply. Its not a question of faults, its a question of what people do with such overwhelming emotions, and if there is such a thing as 'moral redemption' afterwards.
It is the overwhelming guilt, the insane jealousy and the fear of recognising his soul in Quilty's that motivates the murder. Quilty is the one for lust. Quilty was the one who used and abused. Quilty was the one, who, when beggins for his life, comes pouring out with all his smut, sexual perversion and terrible depravity that even Humbert never knew was possible.
It is Quilty's conversation with Humbert at the end before he dies, that really tells us who was the lustful and who loved. Just compare Humbert's poem with Quilty's response. In the poem it is wise to observe Humbert's guilt concerning how he treated Lolita, his jealousy born out of great love, and how he has this overwhelming need for 'redemption';
'Because you took advantage of a sinner
Because you took advantage
Because you took
Because you took advantage of my disadvantage...
... when I stood Adam-naked
before a federal law and all its singing stars
... Because you took advantage of a sin
when I was helpless moulting moist and tender
hoping for the best
dreaming of a marriage in a mountain state
aye of a litter of Lolitas...
Because you cheated me of my redemption
because you took
her at the age when lads
play with erector sets...'
And then he begins to desribe Lolita in images, comparing her to a doll and how Quilty ripped 'the head off' and took her to pieces and threw its head away. Now compare his poetry with Quilty's response. It is filled with self-pity, self-loathing, sleaze, offers (as if he were the devil trying to tempt him), bribes. Also look at the structure of his response; it is mere full-on droning prose. Infact, its an endless paragraph that spans nearly three pages. He mentions every sexual oddity and perversity you can possibly think of, and, only really remembering Lolita once he takes the gun out and shoots something, knowing full well how he is in mortal danger.
Quilty is the lustful one who took advantage. He took advantage of her love for him, and thus completing the cycle of unrequited love. Mrs. Haze has unrequited love for Humbert, Humbert has unrequited love for Lolita, and Lolita has unrequited love for Quilty. What a truly miserable novel! Its a novel that teaches the irregular nature and complexity of love. It shows how people don't choose their natures, but control and restraint is needed for out passion-ridden souls. Humbert can not help loving Lolita, no more than Lolita can help loving someone as perverse as Quilty. Its a novel that deals with completely helpless and almost pathetic characters. Whether its the pityful and almost 'common' Mrs. Haze, the bizarre Quilty, the manipulative Lolita or Humbert, perhaps the most complicated of protagonists.
I have a question for YOU foray; do you think that Lolita is a victim? How much do you think was Lolita's own manipulative doing? Was she manipulative?
Well, that was three questions. Sorry.
Thanks for this topic. I feel very passionate about it.
Ant.