Nabokov's Lolita as a classic challenge:
Among the problems Nabokov’s Lolita poses for the book designer, probably the thorniest is the popular misconception of the title character. She’s chronically miscast as a teenage sexpot—just witness the dozens of soft-core covers over the years. “We are talking about a novel which has child rape at its core,” says John Bertram, an architect and blogger who, three years ago, sponsored a Lolita cover competition asking designers to do better.There is additional discussion of the complexities of book cover illustration at the Imprint source, as well as more examples of covers submitted to the competition.
Now the contest is being turned into a book, due out in June and coedited by Yuri Leving, with essays on historical cover treatments along with new versions by 60 well-known designers, two-thirds of them women...
For obvious reasons, of course, it remains as controversial a novel as it was a half century ago, if not more so. And, probably helped along by Kubrick’s breezy film, and many very terrible covers, the term "Lolita" has come to popularly mean something quite the opposite of the novel’s namesake, so a designer has that to contend with as well.
On the one hand, then, designers face the very real challenge of communicating some of that complexity in a cover, which can easily become overwhelming... On the other hand, I think there are also important ethical considerations that require careful negotiation...
A gallery of 185 Lolita covers (from 37 countries, over 56 years) was posted in 2009.
Embedded book cover design (showing pink walls coverging on a white ceiling): Jamie Keenan.
Child rape? I haven't read the same book most likely.
ReplyDeleteYou might want to reread the book. She was described as 12 or 13 years old, and by definition a child. Whether or not you consider her to be complicit in the encounter, intercourse with her would be rape.
DeleteIf they're that concerned with the misconception of the main character as a teenage sexpot, then why design the cover to resemble the crotch of a young woman?
ReplyDeleteHm, it does resemble legs and white panties. I hadn't noticed that. It does refer to the story line in that it focuses on a little girl's crotch, but I see it as portraying innocence more than sexpot.
DeleteI thought of the view a young girl is likely to see while being abused. In her room, staring up at a corner, trying to pretend it's not happening. If the camera were turned around, you'd see... well, the events of the book.
I think it's brilliant. Of course an innocent mind wouldn't think of it, but that's perfectly on topic, innit?
DeleteMel's interpretation works just as well, and is just as relevant. Again, brilliantly subtle.
I have no urge to read the book, but I know enough of it to gather that the titular character is at best an ephebophile, and in ay case a criminal pervert. The mind reels at the concept, but it probably is worth sober discussion.
It is upsetting that then that it gets the "sexpot" treatment by publishers who don't grasp the gravity of the topic, especially if the character is really that young.
There was an interesting piece on NPR that spoke somewhat on the topic of waning interest of book covers, album covers and the like with the continued evolution and adoption of digital media preferences and ipads, kindles etc. Bookshelves no longer host books and good luck finding a nice CD or even DVD display rack anymore - I'm not that old (40) and even I remember proudly showcasing my book collections and CDs etc...an era on it's way out like the vinyl albums - while still around, are a "vintage" thing...book covers, album covers etc. just won't matter.
ReplyDeleteIf book covers interest you, you might enjoy browsing this site -
Deletehttp://bigbooksearch.com/books
- and it's searchable! (by keyword as well as title)
I've never read it, but I've picked a few favourites from the gallery of 185 covers.
ReplyDeleteOf the covers that contain no hint of sexuality whatsoever, my favourites are this and this.
Of the covers where one ought be able to have a mature, adult debate about whether or not they cross a moral line, my favourites are this and this.
And of course, there are quite a few that are completely beyond the pale. I won't bother to link to them.
It's interesting that in the first two you chose, the artist incorporated a butterfly motif that reflects the fact that Nabokov was a world-class entomologist specializing in lepidoptera.
DeleteHi Stan,
ReplyDeleteThe most controversial thing about Lolita for me now is the contention that the novel was significantly plagiarized. See here: http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,1162961,00.html
Interesting; I had not heard of that. I hope Der Spiegel will write it up. However, if this is all of the concordance -
Delete"First, and most notably, both feature a young girl named Lolita. And both follow the love affair between her and an older man. And in both cases, the girl dies."
- then "plagiarism" might be too strong a term.
btw I see your blogs are continuing to evolve.
OMG, so many inappropriate Lolita's covers! It's a sad collection of designers' incompetence. On the other hand, I find the one heading this post quite clever and atmospheric. A lot of thought went into it. There is another design (not accessible from here) that conveys the story: a man's palm holding a wilted rosebud.
ReplyDelete