Author(s): Elizabeth Holman
Mentor(s): Rick McDonald
Institution UVU
“A Freudian Snare–The Pitfalls of Psychoanalysis in Nabokov’s Lolita” examines the deficits of interrogating Lolita through the lens of psychoanalytic literary criticism. This paper seeks to illuminate the simplification and misinterpretations that occur when psychoanalysis is applied to Lolita without considering Nabokov’s intentions of writing the novel as a parody. The overwhelming parallels between Freud’s analysis of Dora and Nabokov’s Lolita have been observed by numerous critics. While Dora’s case is situated in real life and Lolita on the page, both instances feature young girls preyed upon by lecherous men, and the adult figures in their lives (Dora’s father, Dolores’ mother and other adults) failing or refusing to protect them. John Ingham, author of “Primal Scene and Misreading in Nabokov’s Lolita,” even argues that Lolita can be connected directly to the Dora case. In Dora’s situation, Freud himself could be compared to Humbert Humbert. The several instances where Humbert tries to project his own desires onto Dolores to justify his wicked actions mirror Freud’s countertransference of his own biases and desires onto Dora in support of his misconceived psychoanalytic theories. L. R. Hiatt’s essay “Nabokov’s Lolita: A ‘Freudian’ Cryptic Crossword”, argues that despite Nabokov’s well-documented loathing of psychoanalysis, he “knowingly but surreptitiously endows Humbert with classical symptoms of the Oedipus complex” (Hiatt 361). The foundation of Hiatt’s argument lies in the relationship between Humbert and his mother, which he believes catalyzes Humbert’s obsession with nymphets. Knowing Nabokov’s ardent aversion to Freud and his ideas is well known and well documented, it is difficult to imagine he would espouse Freudian concepts in his novel without greater aims. While Hiatt’s speculations have solid footing, he generalizes and attributes Lolita and Humbert’s actions to an Oedipus complex, which could inadvertently assuage Humbert of guilt. Hiatt misses Nabokov’s true signaling, in which he disavows Freudian ideals. Hiatt’s examination of Lolita through a psychoanalytic lens led him astray, similar to Freud’s outlandish assertions towards Dora, just as Nabokov intended to do.