Caroline's Blog @sweet-carofine - Tumblr Blog

the “lolita” covers

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?

the whole lot of them/us — seeing the world through humbert-tinted glasses, seeing all others as Other and Object, as solipsistic dream-reality. as i scroll through the “lolita” covers i wonder: where’s the humanity in our humanity?

sweetassapphic

spring awakening? more like

pleatedjeans

khemicalvex

Cleanse me Lord and rid me of this white skin

shittier-deactivated20140209

Kids are fucking horrific i don’t want any of them

thankspupper

ayeishteeruu

meninist reply: what about the dads tho? They had to watch the moms push the baby do you know how traumatizing it is to watch a person suffer like that?

wastelandsbaby

Uptown Funk Music Video:

Views: 147,971,975 (and counting) Likes: 1,136,139 (and counting) VEVO Certified: 20th January 2015

theandsign

tittytron

I get really irritated when 6th and 7th graders have cute clothes and sense of style because I feel like every 12 year old needs to go through the horrible peace sign and sequins phase that I did

eukelades

NO BUT IT REALLY DOES PISS ME OFF THAT TEACHERS DONT UNDERSTAND THAT SOME STUDENTS SUFFER FROM MENTAL DISORDERS LIKE SOCIAL ANXIETY

AND FORCE THEM TO TALK IN CLASS FOR A GRADE

LIKE NO THANKS IM PERFECTLY FINE LISTENING AND WRITING NOTES

eukelades

oh my god this post just made a full circle back to my dashboard yes I am still pissed

sweet-carofine

No.

If you are constantly excused from graded activities that other kids have to do you will never ever learn to cope with your assignments. I know someone who once got so anxious he threw up during an oral. Now he performs onstage in our school plays. If everyone had told him he didn't need to participate in oral assignments then i doubt he would be where he is today.

If everyone else has to learn to public speak so do you. You are not special or should be excused because you get anxious. Learn to cope.

sofsocialgood

Married at age 13, Maimuna Abdullahi endured an abusive marriage for a year — and is now at 14 one of thousands of divorced girls in Nigeria. Once married, her husband forced her to drop out of school, blaming her few years of schooling for her disobedience. “She had too much ABCD,” he says. “Too much ABCD.” Maimuna’s situation is representative of many others — only 2 percent of married girls in Nigeria attend school compared to 69 percent of unmarried girls, according to the United Nations. But Maimuna considers her self lucky, because she now attends the Tattalli School Free School for divorced girls and is learning a trade so she can support herself.

Learn more via the AP.