Nabokov, Lolita, and prejudice

This gives me a chance to return to the issue of prejudice - giving my opinion, not any final opinion - which came up early in the semester in regard to Nabokov or his characters being anti-woman. While, as someone with a traditional, though liberal (which meant anti-monarchist, the 18th century sense of liberal) background, Nabokov can never be expected to be in concord with contemporary values held in academia, cultural institutions, etc. However, his views and his characters' apparent views should not be confused.

Essentially, Nabokov might be put off by the American tendency to think in groups, whether we are prejudiced or decrying prejudice. We have already spoken about "categorical thinking" - Charlotte's and the Farlows' tendency to have a fixed and formulaic definition of "masculine" and "feminine." Charlotte's simple-mindedness in this regard is seen by Humbert as a contrast to the relatively fluid European attitude towards such matters: in other words, Europeans of his day were not so obsessed with groups and were less likely to generalize about them. Note that John Farlow complains about "too many Italians" in Lolita's school, and is about to go on when he is interrupted: "at least we are spared the..." Presumably, his going to refer to Irish or blacks. His prejudices show an American tendency to generalize. However, Nabokov would no doubt view discussion of "oppressed groups" as a horrendous example of Soviet-style generalization - and all but meaningless.

Philosophically, Nabokov described himself as an "indivisible monist." Philosophers like Leibniz, Hegel, and Schopenhauer were monists: they believed that everything in the world is essentially "one" (but not in a "we are the world" sense). It is all made of the same "substance," to use the language of Hegel. To put it more simply, everything about Nabokov's beliefs indicated that he hated reductiveness, the tendency to reduce complex phenomena into simple explanations. So, while he sees Charlotte's mistreatment of the maid, Louise, as a sign of her bourgeois ignorance, he probably would not have much patience with those who advocate for the rights of any group either.