What's your favorite book among Nabokov's?

Thank you I can foodspeene myself.

There are probably a lot of people who read Lolita because they are pedophiles, and it's somewhat unfortunate that Nabokov "went there," but the writing in it is some of the best you'll ever find.

Pale Fire by far

I'd rather be feetspooned

He's sort of too shallow for me taste, lads.

The prose in Lolita is unmatched.

care to elaborate what might be shallow about his novels exactly?

Overly polished prose, flaccid-cock stories, tryhard aesthetic exercises. Too artificial. The literature I like was written with filth and blood.

What about Ada?

>overly polished prose
no such thing. the polish serves a purpose.
>flaccid-cock stories
better than hard-cock ones
>tryhard
no, because no.
>aesthetic exercices
yes, that is the name of the game
>too artificial
its art, not reality
>filth and blood
does it get any filthier than pedophilia and murder?

I disagree with literally everything you said, but I respect your point of view.

>I absolutely hated Lolita
opinion absolutely discarded

dito

Lads, I started reading Pale Fire yesterday. What's the "best" way to read it?

Right now, I've read the prologue and the poem and I intended to read the commentaries in order. Should I skip ahead when the commentaries recommender later entries and read those entries or stick to the order they're written in?

Read it in order.

Is Ada good?
I have it somewhere but I haven't gotten around to reading it yet.

Has anyone read his translation of Eugene Onegin?

>Overly polished prose, flaccid-cock stories, tryhard aesthetic exercises. Too artificial. Dislike him intensely.

I agree

based. fuck nabokov

>written with filth and blood
The irony is as you read more you'll discover that the 'filth and blood' writers are the tryhards and the 'clean aesthetes' are actually being genuine but people get assblasted by filters. People dislike the idea of being clean or sophisticated because it presents a barrier to entry and most of academia is slowly becoming inundated with working class plebs.

No, I also enjoy reading Borges and he was a clean aesthete (at least in Spanish anyway since his English translation might be Latinate or snobby). Nabokov seems too plastic for me. Speak, Memory seemed genuine, though, as well as some passages in Lolita. The "filth and blood" thing was perhaps an exaggeration on my part that could be misinterpreted. What I simply meant was having soul. Also, I wouldn't consider Nabokov a clean aesthete. There's parts of his writing that seem rather recherché and some that border on downright purple prose. I still consider him a good writer, just not for me at this particular part of my life.

based

What I've read so far:
>loved
Pale Fire
>liked a lot
Enchanter
Lolita
>liked
The Luzhin Defense

I aim to continue with Pnin.

Lolita can only be understood if you're not a pedo.

Define 'filth and blood'

I love Pnin. It manages to extract so much beauty from the mundane and trivial, it’s really wonderful. It’s funny too, I’m surprised Nabovok is almost never mentioned in threads about funny books.

Filth has no place in literature. You sound like a redditard that likes muh 2666. Kill yourself.

Now that you have read the prologue and the poem, put a bookmark at the beginning of the poem and one at the beginning of the footnotes. If the footnote says "lines x-y" go to the poem and read those lines and then read the footnote. Parallel to one story, there is another, crazier one happening, and it conveys the sense of being watched.

Ada a shit.

>and it's somewhat unfortunate that Nabokov "went there,"
simply end your life

Based

...

I don't read pedophile Jews.

he wasn't either of those

That's what I was going to do, read the lines being commented. I kind of feel that, as the story progresses, the poem becomes less and less important. Like he refers to a single word then goes on for 5 pages about something completely different (it's absolutely amazing, but it gives me the impression the poem is useless in itself).

He was both.

how?

In English Lolita is far better than in Russian. I think he specifically translated Lolita in such a way that people born after the Revolution would hate that book, as said by his soon, Dmitry, that such a country is beyond salvation after four generations of nonfreedom.
In Russian, The Gift is obviously the pinnacle of his work, though Mashenka is quite enjoyable too, because it accords with the rules of traditional Russian literature.
And of course his memoirs are funny if you know where he is taking the piss.

Lolita was written in English, though. You're basically saying that the original is better than the translation. Well, no shit.

Sure, but he translated it himself, therefore it is not completely wrong to expect that the translation would at least partially match the brilliance of the original.

I've read Pnin and Lolita. What next?

Read Faulkner.

Which one would you suggest? The one that starts with the retard?

don't read that corncobbly chronicler

he's great
anything from the main tetralogy

Woah, Yea Forums has really changed. 2666 used to get praised daily. What happened or is this guy the outlier?

No but I want to read the commentary. I want to read partial inspiration for Pale Fire

It is a fun read. Nothing like the original though, but shows what it would have looked like if it was written in the UK in the same time period, which I assume was the intention.