Posted on 02/01/2010 12:31:22 PM PST by JoeProBono
You won't be alone.
I think you need to do a lot more reading then before you opine. The Old Testament consists, early on, gives Gods rules for living the life He wants us to. The rest is how it was applied by His Children, the Jews.
Most items detailing ‘immorality’ as you point out, also detail the consequences when immorality is followed.
Stranger is a fictional work, the Old Testament is not. It SHOULD be read by all, because morality IS important.
Personally, I thought this was just fantastic. I make a point of reading it at least one time per year, just to see if I can find anything that I missed the last time.
The only book of his that I like better is "Past Through Tomorrow", the compilation of short stories omnibus.
In other words he became George Lucas.
I don’t disagree. I don’t really care what folks read. I have read things like Mein Kampf which I find personally frightening and offensive. I don’t find anything of value in porn and I am underwhelmed by stories such as Lolita. I was only commenting on Heinlein’s viewpoint within the book itself. (and he probably personally felt that way). I disagree with Ayn Rand on so many things but I can still read things like Atlas Shrugged and come away knowing that I have been challenged.
Fact is reading a wide variety of things is good for the mind. If your faith and your ability to differentiate good from evil is somehow challenged by a book then perhaps you don’t have a very solid foundation
Perhaps you are the one who needs to read more before you opine. there was nothing in any of my comments that suggested that the Old Testament was fiction. The Old Testament tells us about The Law. The Nazarene fulfilled The Law. Like paul, I am no longer bound by it. All things are lawful is completely Pauline and New Testament. Not all things are useful.
So the OT is now, not only immoral, but not useful either? While not BOUND by it, it is still the Word of God and is supremely useful, as well as moral.
You are a lunatic. I said nothing of the sort.
“Lolita” isn’t what most people think it is - they tend to be spooked by the subject, or get sidetracked by its conceit. Humbert is definitely not a hero and Nabokov didn’t like his character nor did he mean others to like him either, and every form of misbehavior gets its just deserts in the end. I find it a very conservative work in fact.
A character that Nabokov did like he treated very differently - see “Pnin” for one of them.
“Lolita” is indeed a great book, and deserves its reputation.
Nabokov just isn’t my cup of tea. I understand that the Russian angst tends to brutalize much of life. I find it more thn a little distasteful that Humbert is a pedophile of the worst sort. The idea of drugging and raping a young girl is not my idea of a plot twist. To then take the story down a road that basically makes it all okay because after all ‘she seduced him’ and was no virgin is some delusional fantasy.
It is really not much better than tess of the D’Urbervilles.
But its not in fact “OK”.
Humbert, the character, has deluded himself, and continues in his delusion. We can see and appreciate the truth behind the delusion. Its sort of like watching a spectacular crash caused by stupid driving.
Lolita herself is human, flawed, complex and deluded. She also crashes. It does not excuse Humbert.
Nabokov was a superb observer of humanity, besides being a master of language. I compare his ability to get into the complexities of a character to Tom Wolfe, matching Wolfe’s rich structures of irony and layers of hypocrisy. I find Nabokov less cruel than Wolfe though, and superior in his English prose.
Just to bring this all back to the subject -
Compared to Heinlein, Nabokov and Wolfe (to name just a few), Salinger was a child.
Yes it does stink. Begins well, breaks down in one chapter, goes gaga for 500 pages.
The stinkers -
I Will Fear No Evil - very stinky, poor writing way too often, lost in weird monologues.
Time Enough for Love - stinky, should have been a collection of much shorter stories.
The Number of the Beast - An insane mess; should also probably have been a collection of short stories.
Friday - The best of this bad lot, though half the pages in this should have been cut.
Cat Who Walks Through Walls - The most self-referential of these; it reads like Heinleins doodling with his characters and concepts, pointlessly. And the cat business is mawkish.
To Sail Beyond the Sunset - Sex, more sex, and sex yet again, even compared to the others here. And did I mention the sex ? And lectures about, well, sex. A plot may or may not be buried in there somewhere in the sex.
Lolita’s life was absolutely ruined by adults who abused her in horrible ways. She is punished ( as you have described it) because others misused her.
I am not arguing whether this book should be ‘available’ for reading. I do not like Nabokov’s writing style ( it is terribly Russian) and it is ( as I have already said) not my cup of tea. I have explained why I don’t like it and all you want to do is convince me that you are correct. Don’t bother I don’t like the book. I don’t like the story.
Re Grok!
**********
Folks don’t use the word Grok...cuz they don’t Grok it!
+++++++++++++
;)
Re Grok!
**********
Folks don’t use the word Grok...cuz they don’t Grok it!
+++++++++++++
;)
Re
Re Grok!
**********
Folks don’t use the word Grok...cuz they don’t Grok it!
+++++++++++++
;)
58 posted on 12/27/2017, 12:35:57 PM by gunnyg (”A Constitution changed from Freedom, can never be restored; Liberty, once lost, is lost forever...)
********************
YEAH!
Gunny G
************
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.