2013Opticon1826Requires access

The Relevance of Voice for Understanding Ethical Concerns Raised by Nabokov’s 'Lolita' and Burgess’s 'A Clockwork Orange'

Nicolas Estournel

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

In Nabokov’s Lolita and Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange controversial situations of misbehaviour are represented: Humbert and Alex rape, kill, and fight people. While the reader might find the justifications of the characters’ misbehaviour inadequate, s/he is asked, as a result of Cohn’s double pact of fictional autobiography, to accept it as true and coherent. Not only is the reader trapped inside the narrator’s mind, but other characters’ inner selves are also made unreachable. Lolita and the State in A Clockwork Orange are purely Others, and the narrator does not feel any guilt for hurting them. Initially, Quilty and F. Alexander are purely Others too. Nevertheless, both these third-person characters reveal themselves to be symbolically related to the narrators’ selves, mirroring their subjectivity, thus – unusually for first-person novels – forcing the reader to adopt an external point of view on the solipsistic narrators. This distanciation provides the reader with a landmark and gives him or her a chance to perceive the narrator’s unethicality. Such a detachment emphasises the fact that it is possible to consider two contradictory interpretations in Lolita and A Clockwork Orange at the same time. The unethical first-person narrative paradoxically makes the book ethical: the reader is uncomfortably led into the realm of unethicality, and it is his or her own responsibility to question it or not.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In Nabokov’s Lolita and Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange controversial situations of misbehaviour are represented: Humbert and Alex rape, kill, and fight people. While the reader might find the justifications of the characters’ misbehaviour inadequate, s/he is asked, as a result of Cohn’s double pact of fictional autobiography, to accept it as true and coherent. Not only is the reader trapped inside the narrator’s mind, but other characters’ inner selves are also made unreachable. Lolita and the State in A Clockwork Orange are purely Others, and the narrator does not feel any guilt for hurting them. Initially, Quilty and F. Alexander are purely Others too. Nevertheless, both these third-person characters reveal themselves to be symbolically related to the narrators’ selves, mirroring their subjectivity, thus – unusually for first-person novels – forcing the reader to adopt an external point of view on the solipsistic narrators. This distanciation provides the reader with a landmark and gives him or her a chance to perceive the narrator’s unethicality. Such a detachment emphasises the fact that it is possible to consider two contradictory interpretations in Lolita and A Clockwork Orange at the same time. The unethical first-person narrative paradoxically makes the book ethical: the reader is uncomfortably led into the realm of unethicality, and it is his or her own responsibility to question it or not.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In Nabokov’s Lolita and Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange controversial situations of misbehaviour are represented: Humbert and Alex rape, kill, and fight people. While the reader might find the justifications of the characters’ misbehaviour inadequate, s/he is asked, as a result of Cohn’s double pact of fictional autobiography, to accept it as true and coherent. Not only is the reader trapped inside the narrator’s mind, but other characters’ inner selves are also made unreachable. Lolita and the State in A Clockwork Orange are purely Others, and the narrator does not feel any guilt for hurting them. Initially, Quilty and F. Alexander are purely Others too. Nevertheless, both these third-person characters reveal themselves to be symbolically related to the narrators’ selves, mirroring their subjectivity, thus – unusually for first-person novels – forcing the reader to adopt an external point of view on the solipsistic narrators. This distanciation provides the reader with a landmark and gives him or her a chance to perceive the narrator’s unethicality. Such a detachment emphasises the fact that it is possible to consider two contradictory interpretations in Lolita and A Clockwork Orange at the same time. The unethical first-person narrative paradoxically makes the book ethical: the reader is uncomfortably led into the realm of unethicality, and it is his or her own responsibility to question it or not.

Key concepts: Clockwork, Orange (colour), Relevance (law), Psychology, Aesthetics, Philosophy, Biology, Horticulture

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Relevance of Voice for Understanding Ethical Concerns Raised by Nabokov’s 'Lolita' and Burgess’s 'A Clockwork Orange' — Research Paper | ScholarLens