Advanced Higher English
Specialist Study
Impurities of Great Literature:
Flawed Reflection & Troubled Vision
A detailed comparative study of the literary portrayal and
thematic significance of the unreliable narrator in Nabokov’s
Lolita and Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye.
-1-
A detailed comparative study of the literary portrayal and thematic
significance of the unreliable narrator in Nabokov’s Lolita and
Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye.
“Great novels are above all great fairy tales…
Literature does not tell the truth but makes it up.”1
-Vladimir Nabokov
Taking its origin from the 1961 Rhetoric of Fiction by the respected Booth, the “unreliable
narrator”2 is defined as a literary artifice used in fictional works, which questions the
speaker’s credibility, compromising the truth of their representation, due to them being “the
picaro, the clown, the madman and the naïf”3.
Much controversy has been elicited by the publication of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita and J D
Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye – here we have the confessions of a white widowed male4,
the harrowing story of a paedophile in pursuit of his “nymphet”, and a confused teenager’s
three day journey through New York, told from the hospital bed of a psychiatric ward, which
fifties America condemned due to its sexual curiosity and profanities.
Although the approaches undertaken vary in complexity and scope, through the emphasis and
dramatisation of techniques such as structure, language and characterisation, both Nabokov
and Salinger present two very different yet equally unreliable storytellers – Humbert
Humbert and Holden Caulfield.
Durational realism, as perceived by Sartre5, exists in both Catcher in the Rye and Lolita –
that is, indication of an author meddling with the natural succession of events. Their tales
1
Nabokov, Vladimir, The Annotated Lolita, (Penguin Classics, 2000), p16.
Booth, Wayne C, The Rhetoric of Fiction, (University of Chicago Press, 1973), p274.
3
Zerweck, Bruno, Historicising Unreliable Narration: Unreliabilty and Cultural Discourse in
Narrative Fiction, (2001)
4
Nabokov, p16.
5
Booth, p19. (Citation)
2
-2-
take circular structures, beginning at the consequence of their behaviour – Holden is in a
mental ward, whilst Humbert’s is published posthumously with an editor’s foreword.
The development and manipulation of the novels’ structures allows us as readers to be
tricked into believing every part of the narrators’ tales. The lepidopterist, Nabokov, will
undoubtedly have known that the “nymphets”6 of Humbert’s fancy are also another reference
to the pupa which will gradually transform into a butterfly7. This process of metamorphosis
is not only of the animal, but also of Lolita herself, from girl to woman, of Humbert, from
professor to paedophile to murderer, even of the book itself, taking its beginnings from
Humbert’s frenzied notes to eventually an edited version. These ongoing processes of
metamorphosis also enables Humbert to somehow transform his crimes into an almost
redeeming work of art, unbeknownst to the reader who is caught up and manipulated in the
exciting and ever changing plot and road novel parody – what Alfred Appel calls the “game
element” 8 of the novel. Nabokov knows that “metamorphosis is a thing always exciting to
watch”9 and ensures that we, as readers, are subtly manipulated by Humbert through his
gentle use of this complex evolution.
Holden’s constant travels within New York also create a game element in his narration. The
sequence of events, although fairly simplistic in comparison with that of Lolita, reflects the
development of Holden – from the restraining environment at the mental hospital, to the less
restrictive Pencey Prep School to the perceived eventual freedom of New York. All of this of
course inevitably leads him, and the reader, back to the confines of the mental institution,
mirroring the infinite struggle of Holden, whose values and principles do not conform to
society.
Maturation is little achieved in this unconventional bildungsroman, neither is the provision of
closure, thus leaving a feeling that Holden’s plight, if any, is not resolved. Compared to the
complexity of Humbert’s metamorphosis, Holden’s narration is definitely simplistic. Of
course simplicity is revealed through his immature ramblings, adolescent vocabulary and
functional plot but it is the unstructured way he speaks and thinks that reflects not only his
naivety but is also a crucial aspect in our understanding of his role as an unreliable narrator.
6
Nabokov, p16.
Roth, Phyllis A, Critical Essays on Vladimir Nabokov, (G.K.Hall & Co., 1984), (Butler, Diana, Lolita
Lepidoptera), p60.
8
Ibid., p339.
9
Ibid., p340.
7
-3-
Distraction is permitted through both authors’ use of flashbacks which reference a more
harmless and innocent time experienced by the protagonists, thereby eliciting a certain level
of sympathy and realism, which in turn furtively allows the unreliability of their narrative to
go widely unnoticed. Nostalgia of his childhood reflects Holden’s wish for a time when
things were carefree, as well as being representative of the fact that he is not as adult as he
wishes. Reflection on his adolescent sexual discovery allows Humbert to carefully build on
this attraction, until it culminates in his perverted obsession. Through this careful
construction of time, Nabokov skilfully portrays his protagonist’s love as almost innocent
and “right”.
Along with these diverse approaches in formation which condemn our belief in the
raconteurs, language is another technique employed by the authors in contrasting methods to
portray their fallibility.
“I have only words to play with”10, and thus Humbert’s immense capacity for deceit is
exposed. Indeed, given the harsh prison conditions in which he composed the novel, it is
obvious that he is highly manipulative, as his work is intricately structured and designed. A
passion for reading gives rise to endless literary references - even Lolita claims that Humbert
“talk(s) like a book”11. Sophistication of language, in addition to the parody of famous
literary stylistics, somehow manages to reduce Lolita, her indescribable qualities and his own
heinous crimes into a world of literature, language and beauty as the reader is swept up in his
spell.
Conversely, Holden’s narrative is one that doesn’t involve such flair and refinement –
indeed, Salinger has been criticised by some for the short sentences and lack of developed
ideas. The journalist, Anne Goodman, believes that given “Salinger’s undeniable talent one
expects something more.”
12
We can conclude then that this apparent lapse in Salinger’s
standards is a deliberate ruse to mirror what appears at first a simple plot, with a simple
[minded] character whose duplicity deceives us into sympathy and understanding through
simplistic language and speech adopted effectively questioning his reliability as a narrator.
10
Nabokov, p32.
Ibid., p57.
12
Lomazoff, Eric, The Praises and Criticisms of J D Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye (1996)
(Citation)
11
-4-
Insinuating the potential unsoundness of his narrative is the colloquial language adopted by
Holden when he is telling his tale to a doctor. Expressions such as “that’s the truth”13 or “it
really was”14 demonstrate Holden’s desire to convince the reader of something exaggerated
or fictitious. Scepticism is on both the reader and Holden’s side as the more he asks us to
believe him, the less we will. While numerous phrases are used frequently by Caulfield,
Humbert’s narrative contains very little repetition. His constant alternating of fabricated
language allows the reader to absorb every single adjective, metaphor or phrase, furthermore
losing the reader in a world of verbal skill.
Ranked 13th in a compilation of the 100 most challenged books15, there has been much
controversy surrounding the Catcher in the Rye’s publication, partly due to the profanities
within – could this be indicative of Holden’s insecurity and naivety? For someone mentally
instable and internally delicate, the swearing could be interpreted as merely a mask behind
which he wants to hide – this is insinuated when he becomes extremely angry with the
graffiti swearwords at his sister’s school. His frequent use of bad language, although
deplorable, successfully echoes the thoughts of a puzzled and angry adolescent – therefore
adding realism to the text, as well as highlighting his railing against the boundaries of
society. Caulfield is also extremely prone to exaggeration – a short period is lengthened to
“five hours”16, or a lifetime relationship has lasted “five hundred thousand years”17. His
inexperience and lack of sophistication ultimately leads to an inability to understand the
world around him, therefore he must make elucidations and
“often-aphoristic
generalisations”18, which only further compounds his unreliability.
Imagery, symbolism and literary allusions are all featured in Humbert’s beautifully designed
narrative, nonetheless, that is not to say Holden’s is devoid of it – the most significant being
his hunting hat which bears the colour of communism19. Denunciation of his capitalist
society further contributes to Holden’s subjective view of those around him, the “phonies”20.
However, the juxtaposition of his desire to be different and his wish to conform and hide
undoubtedly raises the question of his reliability. His innocence is further embodied through
his wish to never speak to anybody – of course, in a real society this is not possible –
13
Salinger, J.D, The Catcher in the Rye, (Penguin, 1994), p43.
Ibid., p23.
15
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bbwlinks/100mostfrequently.cfm
16
Salinger, p32.
17
Ibid., p113.
18
Salzman, Jack, New Essays on The Catcher in the Rye, (Cambridge University Press, 1991), (Cowan,
Michael, Holden’s Museum Pieces), p38.
19
Tookey, Nigel, York Notes: The Catcher in the Rye, (Longman, 2003), p22.
20
Salinger, p12.
14
-5-
communication is integral to the survival of humanity. With such hopes, one does doubt just
how correct his portrayal is.
Happiness and completion are further embodied in some of his possessions such as his
sister’s record which he covets and deems precious. A desire for childlike joy is
demonstrated by its protection, and the purity that its owner, Phoebe, possesses – something
that he longs for. The obliteration of innocence is embodied in his breaking of the record, and
this leads to a disheartening moment when he contemplates his brother’s grave and even his
own funeral – the mindset of our protagonist is powerfully depicted by Salinger and raises
more questions about his dependability as a storyteller. A further embodiment of Holden’s
purity are ducks in the Central Park pond – although throughout the novel he has sustained a
façade of mature conduct and thinking, symbols such as these undermine his mock attitude
and allow us glimpses into his true nature. His speculation in the ducks’ whereabouts21
resonates the curiosity of, not a grown up, but a young child. A bout of fear is raised within
Holden when he discovers the ducks’ seasonal disappearance, as they reflect revel in radical
transition, an idea undesired given the prominent effect of his brother’s demise on him. The
inability to articulate these disappearances alerts the reader to the narrator’s fallibility as even
the youngest child understands that they will come back.
Contained within Humbert’s narrative is a whole array of symbolism and literary allusions
that mystifies the reader in his world. One of the more prominent symbols in Lolita is that of
the nymphet. Just like the “faery’s child”22 of works as Keats’ La Belle Dame Sans Merci,
the inclusion of a beautiful young girl in the novel suggests the tale of a mortal whose love
for the femme fatale and “demon disguised as a child”23 leads to his degeneration24.
Humbert’s insistence, however, on a paranormal female who can “thrall”25 men is not
entirely accurate as it is he who seduces Lolita, and not vice versa and this demonstrates that
Humbert, in subtle ways overlooked by the reader, often twists the perspective on his story.
The mirrors that appear frequently throughout26 are not only emblematic of his ostensibly
solipsistic nature and the “mask”27 he wears to the world, but also in reference to the endless
mirrors as found in Alice in Wonderland by the nympholeptic Carroll, who Nabokov called
21
Salinger, p74.
Keats, John, The Complete Poems (3rd ed.), (Penguin Classics, 2006), p334, line 41.
23
Roth, (Tamir-Ghez, Nomi, The Art of Persuasion in Nabokov’s Lolita), p168.
24
Nabokov,
25
Keats, p334, line 40.
26
Nabokov, p53.
27
Ibid., p53.
22
-6-
“Carroll Carroll because he was the first Humbert Humbert.”28 Citations to literary are
constant, thus enhancing his learned nature – another reference is to that of Christian
Anderson’s The Little Mermaid, which Humbert presents as a gift29. This is of course no
coincidence – the princess in the tale is symbolic of Lolita herself, who only wants to
“enchant a human heart”30 but fails to do so – an obvious foreshadowing of her own life –
neither Humbert, Quilty or her husband are the princes of her dreams.
The reliability of Humbert’s narrative is put into question through the sheer volume of
symbolism, as much of it seems to be too correlated to be true.
Just like the admired Shakespeare and Joyce, could Humbert be adding these images in order
to intensify the novel’s beauty? If that is the case, then it provides further indication of his
unreliability. Considering that this novel, just like that of Holden’s, a first person narrative
and representative of a real life scenario, the inclusion of such symbolism gives the tale an
almost aberrant gloss. Nevertheless, perhaps that is why it’s so alluring, as it deals with a
distressing situation yet manages to seem beautiful and morally right, when it obviously is
anything but.
Through the close examination of Holden and Humbert’s articulation we’re able to realise
that what they express may not necessarily be true. The use of language is of particular
significance in the case of our scholarly paedophile who uses words to elevate his appalling
content to art-like beauty. Yet, it is through this remarkable language style that his
unreliability is revealed as it is “not a spontaneous outpouring of emotion, but a carefully
crafted, multileveled text”31. The captivation of the reader into Humbert’s linguistic trickery
compels us to penetrate his mind thus not allowing us to perceive him as what he really is.
Holden, conversely, does not yield to linguistic development to misinform, but instead is
honest and admits he is a “liar”32 at the forefront of the text and indeed throughout, therefore
making us think twice before believing his words.
A complexity in their constructions is revealed through Humbert and Holden’s need to
deceive - indeed our defective reflectors are two extremely interesting characters who on the
outset seem to be different but actually share several similarities. How does the presentation
28
Nabokov, p381.
Ibid., p174.
30
Ibid., p397. (Citation)
31
Rampton, David, Modern Novelists: Vladimir Nabokov, (Macmillan, 1993), p84.
32
Salinger, p14.
29
-7-
by the two authors make them fallacious, yet at the same time manage to trick us into feeling
sympathy towards them and their circumstances?
The erudite Humbert is perhaps not the archetypal nympholept, but it is this deviation from
the orthodox which elevates his eminence in the reader’s mind. This “salad of racial genes”33
who intended to study psychiatry eventually ended up as a “pipe smoking teacher in
tweeds”34. Much like his own creator, he has a talent for the English language, as proven to
the reader; he published “torturous essays”35, had conversations “on Soviet movies with
expatriates”36 and his own dissertation was entitled “The Proustian Theme in A Letter from
Keats to Benjamin Bailey”37, amongst other achievements. It is his awareness of Joyce38,
Baudelaire39, Keats40 and Poe41 and his general knowledge, given his French upbringing,
which dazzles the reader – an element fundamental to convincing us of his morality. It is this
well read nature that also permits him to be so intelligent with language, and to disguise the
truth whilst presenting a more pleasant and satisfying reflection to the reader, who is often
engrossed in his lyrical and superlative prose. Indeed, his earlier occupation as perfume
salesman echoes the ability to masquerade any offences which gradually advanced into the
more convincing concealment of misdemeanours through words.
Ultimately Holden’s gateway to unreliability is his naivety. Like Humbert, he may adopt a
mask but he is merely an adolescent and does not fully understand the world, or the transition
to adulthood. As part of the new generation of teenagers in 1950’s America, Holden’s views
and attitudes are perhaps characteristic of the rebellion at the time. With this shade added to
his perspective, it is expected that his presentation will be one with predisposition. The more
open, non-conformist views prevalent allowed Holden to be more comfortable in his
denunciation of those around him. The expulsion of Holden from four schools prove his nonconformity – he was expelled not because of his lack of attainment, but because he was
“surrounded by phonies”42. However, amongst his own peers fitting in is difficult – this could
be down to the fact that he does not see any purpose in making acquaintances with people
such as Stradlater. Firstly, his quick judgements and philosophies on everyone condemns him
33
Nabokov, p9.
Ibid., p15.
35
Ibid., p16.
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid., p221.
39
Ibid., p162.
40
Ibid., p183.
41
Ibid., p330.
42
Salinger, p12.
34
-8-
to be held back socially, and secondly his naivety of being able to confront society by
himself via his own rules also ultimately means his approaches will not be appropriate or
successful in a normal community. This innocence, combined with his unstable state of mind,
makes it fairly apparent that his narrative is both one sided and unsound.
A clear believer of solipsism, Humbert, whose world is very egotistic for the majority of the
novel, may not deliberately intend to deceive, but may do so due to his lack of consideration
for others, in particular Lolita. His self centred environment makes him believe that Lolita
enjoys his perversions and she seduces him initially, and his narrative is therefore presented
in this way. Not until the latter part of the novel does he begin to step back and appreciate
that “nothing could make my Lolita forget the foul lust I had inflicted upon her”43.
He treats her well, constantly spoiling her with sweets and presents, referring to her as
“Cheri”44, but for him this is purely justification for his actions, which he convinces himself
are ethical. However, on an alternative reading, could Humbert be further manipulating us
when he speaks of him and Lolita being “safely solipsised”45? Since Booth acknowledges
that if one is truly concerned with only oneself, then the “only motive for writing is that he
wants to write”46 and for solipsistics “to worry about the reader would be absurd,”47 what is
Humbert actually writing for? Complexly examined, we can interpret that his narrative is
centred on this philosophy simply to trick the reader into believing that he is writing only for
himself, and that every word is therefore true.
Personal family life is also affected by Holden’s philosophy of the world being full of
“phonies”48 - his father’s occupation as a lawyer condemns him to be false, paralleling the
idea Holden holds of his parents, who would
“have about two haemorrhages apiece if I told anything personal about them….
Especially my father…they’re also as touchy as hell”49.
In an innocent and naïve world, Holden doesn’t realise that such actions do not necessarily
mean people are untrue, just polite, or playing their societal roles.
43
Nabokov, p283.
Ibid., p68.
45
Ibid., p60.
46
Booth, p394.
47
Ibid., p394.
48
Salinger, p12.
49
Ibid., p1.
44
-9-
Society would most definitely become corrupt if everyone’s views were like his own, yet in
typical rebellion, this is not accepted. Salinger skilfully portrays Holden’s innocence
through many aspects of the novel – for one, Holden shows enhanced interaction with
younger characters, such as his sister Phoebe, whereas he cannot find comfort in people
such as Antolini, or his brother, DB, a film writer who is “being a prostitute”50 in
Hollywood. Further testament to his unreliability are his quick judgements, as is his attempt
to act like an adult despite his attachments to the childlike qualities of a world where
transience is non-existent and reality need not be confronted.
Psychological analysis may be used on Humbert’s narrative, yet he tries to discredit
psychology throughout his memoir, believing that simplistic, logical explanation cannot be
used to explain his conduct, in particular his love for Lolita. The belief that his love needs
no logical explanation gives rise to his dislike of psychology, but another reason may be
that he does not want himself to be exposed as at odds with society, who censures his
actions. Through his undermining of this field, the reader who is so far rapt in his majestic
narration begins to view him as merely unique, and not insane or corrupt. We as observers
now begin to perceive his actions as not the product of his disturbed mindset, but part of an
uncontrollable emotion he feels for Lolita, one out-with simple psychosomatic
classification.
The possible misinterpretation of the incident Holden has with his teacher, Mr Antolini,
also shows his naivety and ultimate unreliability. Yes, he could be true in his reading, as
Antolini called him “handsome”51 and inquired “how’re all your women?”52 but it is
perhaps more likely that it is really an alcohol induced show of fondness which had no
homosexual undercurrents. Knowing full well Holden’s fragility, Mr Antolini saw the need
for an adult figure to bring him back on the right track. However, Holden, who “makes
judgements by the dozen”53 interprets this as a sexual advance - understandable, given his
innocence and suppression of sexual attraction. However, because of the journey the reader
has overcome with Holden, the loss of assurance in this rare figure of trust, although
unsoundly narrated, allows us to empathise with him, and perhaps not realise what his real
intentions were.
50
Salinger, p1.
Ibid., p172.
52
Ibid., p171.
53
Lomazoff (Citation)
51
- 10 -
Alienation is emphasised greatest during the road trip through America – perhaps even
more stress is laid on this period than Humbert’s actual incarceration. These open,
unfamiliar environments force the two to become increasingly detached from society’s
norms and they fail to confront the moral depravation of what they are embarking on. This
is of course fundamental to the criticism of his reliability – his lack of acknowledgment of
the immorality of his actions, although already existent, are now heightened in the
American wastelands and unfamiliar cities. The same is evident in Lolita, who, with no one
left but Humbert, gives into his perversions, and through the eyes and narration of Humbert
is thus misinterpreted as seduction and mutual love.
Feeling trapped in “the other side”54 of life, Holden’s journey is also one of alienation – but
it seems like this is used as a form of protection. His inability to conform with his
classmates and the phoniness he constantly sees in the civilisation around him means that
isolation is a comfort in his life. Ironically this is also the source of many pains – if he had
someone to speak to, an adult in whom he can trust, then his problems could be dealt with
and his life needn’t be burdened. Driven through loneliness to meet with Sally Hayes, it is
also his alienated nature which repels her and Jane Gallagher whom he once loved, is now
lost due to his inability to interact. His alienation may be significant in his journey but it
also brings him to a mental breakdown and undermines his reliability. His colloquial and
“incantation”55 like prose may also originate from his isolation – his trust in the reader and
joy in having someone to converse with leads to the development of a tale that is
heightened for our interest.
Sexuality is forever present in Humbert’s world, but a more reserved perspective is
undertaken by Holden. Sexual relations strikes apprehension and perplexity into him,
which derives from isolation. Unlike the frozen objects in the Natural History Museum,
conflict and unpredictability are embodied in adult relations, whereas child relationships
are much simpler. This confusion in sexuality leads him to misinterpret the Antolini
incident, and thus makes his narrative unsound.
Symmetry permeates the novel so it comes as no surprise that the name, Lolita (of both the
protagonist’s object of desire and the book itself), is carefully sequenced to accentuate her
54
55
Salinger, p7.
Salzman, p5.
- 11 -
effects on Humbert. Not only is her name the first word in the foreword, but also the first
and last words in the novel. Despite ensuring her significance is carefully and clearly
shown, this example of symmetry undermines Humbert’s plausible narrative which is
meant to have been produced in his frenzied last days. It is questionable how someone who
is due for death is able to confess so beautifully and metaphorically, yet truthfully.
Furthermore, Humbert’s role as an unsound raconteur is presented through this choice of
moniker, which is no accident – her real name is Dolores and Humbert is the only one who
uses “Lolita”56 – through the reader’s usage of her pet name we taking his perspective.
Poe’s Annabel Lee is the most famous allusion drawn by this name as it also deals with the
love of young girls. Another façade is also given to the reader at the end of the novel when
we realise that Humbert is a pseudonym – if he could hide that throughout the novel, what
else is masked?
The title The Catcher in the Rye is of some significance – indeed, Holden’s
misinterpretation of the Burns’ poem “Comin’ Thro’ The Rye” shows his quick judgement
and own personal analysis. The title is explained in chapter 22, when Holden claims the
line is “If a body catch a body comin’ through the rye,” 57 when it is actually “If a body
meet a body, coming through the rye.”58 Even though Burns meant for the poem to raise
the question of commitment, Holden, ironically, changes it to “catch”59, as he wants to
grasp children before the transition to maturity. The significance of this altered line is
evident to the reader as symbolic of his desire to remain in a joyful, protected child world.
There has also been interest raised in the protagonist’s name - Holden can be a phonetic
illustration of “hold on”60 whilst caul is the “membrane enclosing a foetus”61 – extremely
fitting as he tries desperately to hold onto innocence and avoid adulthood.
Our two protagonists are also subject to any prejudices that the reader may have about them
which may, in turn, give rise to reservations about their reliability as narrators. Obviously,
Humbert’s paedophilic and murderous tendencies instantly condemn him in the readers’
eyes, and one would assume that since he is confessing about his crimes, there will be some
level of deceit. However, through his complex use of language it is no longer the content
that shocks the reader, more “the fact that they found themselves unwittingly accepting,
56
Nabokov, p9.
Salinger, p155.
58
Ibid., p156.
59
Ibid., p155.
60
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_Caulfield
61
Ibid.
57
- 12 -
even sharing, the feelings of Humbert Humbert”62. So impressive is his linguistic trickery
that the viewpoint of the shocked audience is modified into one of acceptance and empathy,
and abandoned are any prejudices one may have had about him – he is now perceived as
just a man with an infatuation for another.
Judgement passes on Holden’s narrative when his mental instability is revealed and we
become wary of what he conveys – our belief that the mentally unstable cannot be entirely
reliable ultimately colours our judgement on the character. The picaresque nature of the
novel is given life through Holden’s rogue-like behaviour and rough, colloquial speech
style which also raises suspicion of his narrative, arising from prejudices society has
regarding those who are less refined. Salinger, nevertheless, through the depiction of his
protagonist’s naivety, manipulates emotionally the reader into sympathising with his
situation which challenges our preconceived prejudices.
Nabokov’s skill and mastery forces the reader to neglect preconceived viewpoints and we
see Humbert differently. Salinger’s protagonist, however, relies more heavily on these
prejudices in comparison to portray to the reader a character that, although we sympathise
with, cannot be wholly trusted.
The truth of literature is not straightforward. It is only known by the novelist, and even then
it is only existent within their minds, so how can we as observers say that the narrators’
articulation does not present truth?
It is the conscious decision of both authors to present such storytellers that makes it
acceptable to suspect them – the hints, subtle and not-so-subtle, that are laced throughout
the texts increasingly raises the level of scepticism in their representation. Complex
observation and examination into, the linguistic deception of Humbert and the philosophy
and attitudes of Holden, confirm to the deceived reader that Lolita’s seduction is wrongly
interpreted, as is that of Antolini’s advance.
Despite the narratives modifying the perspectives from which readers will view the novels,
it is also the narratives which enhance the true meaning and complexity of the texts. Ortega
“much doubt(s) that any young person of our time can be impressed by a poem, a painting,
62
Roth, (Tamir-Ghex, Nomi, The Art of Persuasion in Nabokov’s Lolita), p158.
- 13 -
or a piece of music that is not flavoured with a dash of irony”63. It is the humour in
Holden’s naivety and the linguistics yielded to by Humbert which, although deems them as
flawed spokesmen, ultimately turns their tales from being purely and tediously episodic to
two of the greatest works of the twentieth century.
(4473 words)
63
Booth, p338. (Citation)
- 14 -
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Nabokov, Vladimir, The Annotated Lolita, Penguin Classics, 2000
Salinger, J.D, The Catcher in the Rye, Penguin, 1994
Secondary Sources
American Library Association: List of 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books of 1990–2000
Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bbwlinks/100mostfrequently.cfm
Appel, Alfred, The Annotated Lolita, Penguin Classics, 2000
Booth, Wayne C, The Rhetoric of Fiction, University of Chicago Press, 1973
Hobsbaum, Philip, Unreliable Narrators: Poor Things and its Paradigms,
Available: http://www.arts.gla.ac.uk/SESLL/STELLA/COMET/glasgrev/issue3/hobs.htm
History Television: The Femme Fatale Throughout History
Available: http://www.history.ca/content/ContentDetail.aspx?ContentId=73
Keats, John, The Complete Poems (3rd ed.), Penguin Classics, 2006
Lomazoff, Eric, The Praises and Criticisms of J D Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, 1996
Available: http://www.levity.com/corduroy/salinger1.htm
Marcus, Amit, The Self-Deceptive and the Other-Deceptive Narrating Character: The Case
of Lolita, Style. Dekalb: Summer 2005. Vol. 39, Issue 2; pg 187, 21 pgs.
Available: http://lion.chadwyck.co.uk
Moore, Anthony R, How Unreliable is Humbert in Lolita Journal of Modern Literature,
Bloomington, Fall 2001. Vol. 25, Issue 1; pg 71, 11 pgs.
Available http://lion.chadwyck.co.uk
Parker, Stephan Jan, Understanding Vladimir Nabokov, University of South Carolina Press,
1987
Rampton, David, Modern Novelists: Vladimir Nabokov, Macmillan, 1993
Salzman, Jack, New Essays on The Catcher in the Rye, Cambridge University Press, 1991
Sharpe, Tony, Modern Fiction: Vladimir Nabokov, Edward Arnold (Hodder and Stoughton),
1991
Tookey, Nigel, York Notes: The Catcher in the Rye, Longman, 2003
- 15 -
Zerweck, Bruno, Historicising Unreliable Narration: Unreliability and Cultural Discourse
in Narrative Fiction, 2001
Available: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2342/is_17_56/ai_97074176
Wikipedia: Holden Caulfield Article
Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holden_Caulfield
- 16 -