Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”

This essay focuses on the problem of naming the heroine of Nabokov’s famous novel. From the very beginning, her name is both overdetermined and indeterminate. As the novel proceeds, she is designated by an increasing number of diminutives, aliases, and misnomers, even as her own perspective remains...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Susan Elizabeth Sweeney
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès 2010-11-01
Series:Miranda: Revue Pluridisciplinaire du Monde Anglophone
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.openedition.org/miranda/1479
id doaj-f5c8f653e5144df798bf93f4727e3fa0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f5c8f653e5144df798bf93f4727e3fa02020-11-24T21:01:22ZengUniversité Toulouse - Jean JaurèsMiranda: Revue Pluridisciplinaire du Monde Anglophone2108-65592010-11-01310.4000/miranda.1479Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”Susan Elizabeth SweeneyThis essay focuses on the problem of naming the heroine of Nabokov’s famous novel. From the very beginning, her name is both overdetermined and indeterminate. As the novel proceeds, she is designated by an increasing number of diminutives, aliases, and misnomers, even as her own perspective remains elusive. Humbert calls her by various names—for example, “Lo” at home, “Dolly” with her friends and teachers, and “Dolly Schiller” after her marriage—but reserves “Lolita” to signal her role in his fantasies and memories. As a result, “Lolita” comes to represent not the novel’s heroine, but rather her construction as a nymphet within Humbert’s imagination. How she would choose to name herself is unclear—she signs her letter to Humbert, for example, as “Dolly (Mrs. Richard F. Schiller)” (266)—but it would certainly not be as “Lolita”. And yet, until very recently, reviewers and critics always referred to her by Humbert’s pet name, as if there were no difference between the actual child and her role in his fantasies—or, indeed, her afterlife in his memoir. “Lolita” comes to represent not only Humbert’s imaginary construction of a nymphet but also his desperate attempts to make that construction permanent within his text. The fact that most readers still refer to the novel’s heroine as “Lolita” suggests that Humbert’s efforts have generally succeeded.http://journals.openedition.org/miranda/1479LolitaDolorescharactercharacterizationnamenaming
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Susan Elizabeth Sweeney
spellingShingle Susan Elizabeth Sweeney
Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
Miranda: Revue Pluridisciplinaire du Monde Anglophone
Lolita
Dolores
character
characterization
name
naming
author_facet Susan Elizabeth Sweeney
author_sort Susan Elizabeth Sweeney
title Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
title_short Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
title_full Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
title_fullStr Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
title_full_unstemmed Lolita, I Presume; On a Character Entitled “Lolita”
title_sort lolita, i presume; on a character entitled “lolita”
publisher Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès
series Miranda: Revue Pluridisciplinaire du Monde Anglophone
issn 2108-6559
publishDate 2010-11-01
description This essay focuses on the problem of naming the heroine of Nabokov’s famous novel. From the very beginning, her name is both overdetermined and indeterminate. As the novel proceeds, she is designated by an increasing number of diminutives, aliases, and misnomers, even as her own perspective remains elusive. Humbert calls her by various names—for example, “Lo” at home, “Dolly” with her friends and teachers, and “Dolly Schiller” after her marriage—but reserves “Lolita” to signal her role in his fantasies and memories. As a result, “Lolita” comes to represent not the novel’s heroine, but rather her construction as a nymphet within Humbert’s imagination. How she would choose to name herself is unclear—she signs her letter to Humbert, for example, as “Dolly (Mrs. Richard F. Schiller)” (266)—but it would certainly not be as “Lolita”. And yet, until very recently, reviewers and critics always referred to her by Humbert’s pet name, as if there were no difference between the actual child and her role in his fantasies—or, indeed, her afterlife in his memoir. “Lolita” comes to represent not only Humbert’s imaginary construction of a nymphet but also his desperate attempts to make that construction permanent within his text. The fact that most readers still refer to the novel’s heroine as “Lolita” suggests that Humbert’s efforts have generally succeeded.
topic Lolita
Dolores
character
characterization
name
naming
url http://journals.openedition.org/miranda/1479
work_keys_str_mv AT susanelizabethsweeney lolitaipresumeonacharacterentitledlolita
_version_ 1716778224684367872