Is Humbert Humbert the narrator and main character in the confessional or anti-confessional narration?
“Lolita” is a first-person confessional narrative, composed in a jail on the verge of a fatal “coronary thrombosis” (L3) that is heart failure by Humbert Humbert, an intelligent European immigrant. Humbert’s story is prefaced by a Foreword written by John Ray Ph.D, who introduces himself as the editor of the manuscript.
John Ray’s fictitious preface informs the reader that Humbert wrote his narrative in prison “in legal captivity” (L10) “under observation” (L10) as Humbert specifies later while awaiting his trial. This means that when Humbert begins writing the story, he already knows its ending, and all the facts that lead to it. Moreover, Humbert as the narrator writing in the first person “I”, acquired pieces of information about himself while experiencing the “I” without realizing it.
Although the novel is named “Lolita” and she is its topic of debate, Humbert feels compelled to tell his reader, towards the end of the book that “this book is about Lolita” (L253). Nevertheless, the book is not quite about Lolita herself, since Humber does not really understand the girl, in fact he presents the obsessive image about Lolita in his tormented mind.
In addition, another important fact which leads to the conclusion that Humbert Humbert is an unreliable narrator is his very statement that he is rewriting by “photographic memory”(L10) the diary he had destroyed five years ago. “I remember the thing so exactly because I wrote it really twice. First I jotted down each entry in pencil (with many erasures and corrections).. then I copied it” (L40). Although he claims he can reproduce his diary ad litteram, it is impossible to recall verbatim what one wrote a long period ago.
“Lolita, like countless detective and horror stories presents itself as a textual game, insists not only on its verbal but on its written quality. It is a novel pretending to be a memoir with a forward.. as many novels pretend to be biographies” (Michael Wood 72) Humbert’s confession is based not only on the defense which is supposed to be presented as evidence in his trial, but also on different types of texts such as : poems, letters, a class list, diary entries, pages from magazines, shop signs, motel signs, excerpts from motel registers. In spite of the fact that he wants to be credible and realistic, Humbert gives us every reason to doubt his story. Yet, in the end we accept him and his story because he seems very eager to admit mistakes, he lets us see how much he suffers when he realizes the irreversible harm he had done to a child.
Another instance of hesitation between trust and distrust occurs when we read Charlotte’s passionate letter for her lodger “You see there is no alternative. I have loved you from the minute I saw you. I am a passionate and lonely woman and you are the love of my life” (L 67) The style in which is written is clearly Charlotte’s and we are under the impression that is complete. Yet the letter is not complete, as we read only what Humbert remembers of it and what he wants us to read “What I present here is what I remember of letter and what I remember of the letter verbatim.. I was at least twice longer. I have left out a lyrical passage which I more or less skipped at the time” (L68)
Humbert is a manipulative narrator who is trying to gain the reader on his side, by making him aware that he was a victim as well, and by recounting in detail how he became a pedophile. This romance he attempts to create is not a love story between Humbert and Lolita but it is only Humbert’s romance as his affection is not shared, moreover Lolita despises him because he has deprived her of childhood : “You merely broke my life” (L279). So this anti-confession is not about him and Lolita, but about him and his dream of Lolita.
The girl is his mental image, a nymphet whom he tried to translate into reality and by doing so, he only managed to ruin both of their lives. It is really difficult to decide whether Humbert Humbert is a confessor or an anti-confessor, since it all depends on the way he is perceived by the reader. On the one hand, he is a confessor because he tells the story and admits having committed the crimes, but on the other hand he is an anti-confessor since he is an artist engaged in the creation of a work of art centred on his own being, but existing outside the realm of fact.
Nabokov presents the facts from the criminal’s point of view, although it would have been expected to be told by a witness or even by the actual victim, namely Lolita herself. Humbert depicts his emotional world, and his thoughts and feelings about what happened represents the only perspective of the plot the reader gets. Even the fact that Nabokov wanted to portray his culprit as an intelligent, well-mannered, middle-aged man has an utmost importance as this type of person can be easily identified with the average reader. “Humbert Humbert is our protagonist and we are unable to dissociate ourselves from him.. because he represents a part of ourselves we are normally proud of. What he represents… is our intelligence” (Martin Green 32)
The entire narrative is written by Humbert as a result he has total freedom to select only the episodes and the arguments that he sees essential and also to share his personal view about the events before his imprisonment. He employs different narrative strategies on the course of the novel: for instance he does not allow his potential accuser that is Lolita to tell her side of the story. This is the reason why, in the novel Lolita’s voice appears only a couple of times in direct speech, all the rest being Humbert’s personal version of the events. As a result, throughout the novel, the reader becomes acquainted only to Humbert’s fears, emotions and thoughts and Lolita as well as he possible replies are practically forgotten.
With the purpose of defeating himself, the narrator claims that he treated the girl well and that she spent a wonderful time in his company : “then she crept into my waiting arms, radiant, relaxed, caressing me” (L 120)
Humbert tries to record the events in a chronological order and limits himself only to the past. In his story he makes uses of two distinct types of personal narration: the diary and the memoir. He wants to offer a detailed framework of the events, yet he also dramatizes the past in order to make the reader share his feelings. Or perhaps, he intends to emphasize the idea that he repents his sins, that he has became a completely different man.
Nabokov chose this narrative stance in order to play games with the reader, giving him false clues and deceiving leads. Although we learn from the beginning that Humbert is imprisoned for having committed a felony, we are not acquainted with what the felony was and who the victim was, which confers suspense and mystery throughout the novel. For instance at a certain point Humbert confesses his desire of murdering Charlotte, Lolita’s mother and he even conceives some plans to get rid of her; therefore, the reader thinks he discovered who the victim was. Surprisingly Charlotte dies of a car accident and Humbert has nothing to do with it, so the reader finds himself again in the starting point. Nevertheless, Humbert has his share of guilt, which he admits: “Within the intricacies of the pattern (Hurrying, housewife, slippery pavement, pest of a dog..) I could dimly distinguish my own vile contribution” (L 103) Furthermore, in the narrator’s discourse we find both elements of self-accusations and self-justification. On the other hand, he blames himself for the selfish deeds, calling himself a maniac, but on the other hand everything he says can be interpreted as a mere form of justifying his acts in order to get the reader’s sympathy. He comes up with some arguments in his attempt to defend himself. One of his excuses for his immoral behavior is that he has a childhood fixation caused by an unconsumed love affair for a girl. Her name is Annabel Leigh. Continuing his idea, he states that “ I am convinced, however that in a certain way Lolita began with Annabel.. Annabel’s death consolidated the frustration” (L14) Unfortunately the girl died before they had the chanceto fulfill their love. That is how he explains his obsession for Lolita, whom he considers a sort of reincarnation of his “dead bride” Annabel (L 15). Furthermore, he brings up examples of famous men in love with young girls like Dante with Beatrice when “ she was nine” (L19) and Petrarch with Laura “ she was a fair-headed nymphet of twelve” (L19). He also states that nowadays there are plenty twenty five years old men who have relations with minors “.. a civilization which allows a man of twenty five to court a girl of sixteen, but not a girl of twelve (L 18), yet he does fail to mention that he is almost twenty five and the only feelings Lolita has for him are of hatred and despise.
In addition, he describes Lolita as a nymphet, a person with a demonic nature. He accuses her of seducing him and also of having a previous intercourse with another man. So, Humbert treats the child as a mere object, this way denying her humanity. He also describes her, focusing on the nymphet qualities, reason for which he finds her attractive, while rarely bearing in mind her feelings and inner thoughts. Though he notices Lolita’s vulgarity and bad character, he insists on her connection with Annabel. This connection between the two girls is significant only to Humbert, who considers himself a special man because he is able to recognize this uniqueness of a nymphet like Lolita. This discrepancy between Lolita the nymphet and the actual girl is designed as a parallel to Humbert’s language that creates romantic idea out of unromantic happenings. He describes his perverse lust through a beautiful and stylized prose, offering thus an attractive narrative out of repulsive deeds. He feels compelled to make up stories to distract the reader’s attention from his pedhophilia. In contrast, Lolita may be perceived as a victim of Humbert’s appeal “In Lolita to kill Lolita would be the most banal Frankie-and Johnny’s conclusion” (Andrew Field 346) So, wiping up the life of Lolita is not un unexpected resolution of the plot. The real victim is Clare Quilty, Humbert’s double- the man who took Lolita away from him.
The public he addresses during the novel is either the judge or the reader, this proving the existence of two speech situations: one belonging to a person who tries to defend himself in a court of law, and that of an author of an important manuscript. Even the attitudes he takes when addressing to these categories of people is different, because he seems to look up to the authorities, talking with a higher degree of respect : “Gentlem of the jury.. Bear with me! Allow me to take ..” (L 123) than when reaching the readers – his equals : “I want my learned reader to participate in the scene” (L 57)
The duality of the addressee has a correspondent in the duality of the speaker himself, who impersonates both the narrating “ I” of the present, and the experience “ I” of the past. As a narrator, he sometimes refers to himself in the third person, denying “his personality” “there must have been times, if I know my Humbert (L 70). Moreover, the first part of Humbert’s narrative is based not only on his fantastic memory, but also on the diary he kept during the time he spent at the Haze Family, so we do not have only “an earlier and later Humbert” (Michael Bell 19) but also an earlier and later writer.
Even the narrator has full control over the story, it is impossible as reader not to figure out how things really took place and especially what Lolita felt about everything that happened. During her voyage with Humbert she is isolated from the children of her age, from the world of toys and happiness, instead she is bribed with clothes and money, which later he took them off. He imposes her sexual demands and sometimes he resorts to violence in order to obtain what he desired. It is obvious that she does not enjoy any of these treatments, and more than that, that she detests the man who destroyed her life.
Still even perfectly aware of Humbert’s deeds, the readers feels a sort of symphaty for the man who speaks so openly about his life. Only in the end does he understand that he truly loves Lolita for what she is, not for her qualities of nymphets.Even his name, Humbert Humbert is a pseudonym that suggests the duality of a witty well-read, nympholept who writes the story for various reasons : to prepare his defense for his murder trail, to explain his special passion for a twelve years old girl, to try to extirpate his sins and to immortalize his beloved Lolita.
In conclusion, even Humbert Humbert seems to be a reliable narrator at a fist glance, by the end of the novel, we find out that he underwent psychotherapy “his complete restoration to a discovery.. that there was an endless source of robust enjoyment in trifling with psychiatrists “ (L34) Just like Nabokov himself, Humbert is not a proponent of psychoanalysis and Freud, therefore he mocks them on the course of the novel, undermining the possible explanations for Humbert’s passion. The novel records Humbert’s passion-obsession from passivity to activity, and from observation to violation. In his attempt to rediscover Annabel, Humbert’s quest covers twenty-five years of madness until he meets Lolita. In addition to this, the novel is written in present tense, another strategy, this one used with the purpose of emphasizing that Lolita is a real girls, that she exists in flesh and blood.
Humbert perceives his experience through a veil of literature; he considers himself a character in a work of fiction and first sees Lolita in the context of a fairy tale. One of the most correlations he makes is between his old flame, Annabel Leigh and the heroine Annabel Lee, the wife of Edgar Allan Poem’s poem “Virginia was not quite fourteen when Harry Edgar possessed her. He gave her lessons of algebra “ (L43). Humbert sees himself a version of Poe since he makes references to the former of the novel. On certain occasions he even writes his signature under the name “Mr Edgar H. Humbert (L74). In the slow clear handoff crime I wrote: Dr Edgar H Humbert and daughter” (L118)
The techniques Humbert appeals to make the novel veritable (1st person writing style so subjectivity, few insertions of Lolita verbal acts, the usage of present tense, narration from memories which later became the reason of public apology, references to other personalities) turn out to reveal an anti-confession narration.
Bibliography
Dembo L S Nabokov: The Man and His Work Madison, Milkwakee and London: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1967
Wood Michael “Lolita Revisited” New England Review, no 15, vol.17, 1995
Green Martin “Tolstoy and Nabokov: The morality of Lolita” The Kenyon Review 28, no3, June 1982
Field Andrew, Nabokov: His life in Art London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1967
Bell Michael, “Lolita and Pure Art”. Essay in Criticism, no 2, April 1974
Rivers JE and Nicol Clarles Nabokov’s Fifth Arc, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1982