When the Harvey Weinstein thread was finally unpicked, and the swathes of stories about his sexual misconduct came loose for the world to witness, the most pressing question to me was, 'how was this only just being talked about now? Why hadn't these actresses come forward before to talk? Or why are they only just being listened to now?' The stories, horrific and graphic in nature, dated back three decades, and some of the actresses were incredibly high profile; it seemed almost unbelievable that the cover up had continued for this long. I suddenly thought about my dissertation, the topic of which was:
"American Beauty and the Beast of the Male Gaze – The complex representation of female adolescence in Lolita and The Virgin Suicides"
"American Beauty and the Beast of the Male Gaze – The complex representation of female adolescence in Lolita and The Virgin Suicides"
In this, I realised:
A feminist reading of Lolita and The Virgin Suicides is important as for many young women, systematic abuse and objectification is everyday reality. Whilst, many critics see the representation of women and the disturbing subject matters as limiting and upholding the ideals of patriarchy, I see these texts as unveiling the truth about the oppression of women. In 'Reading Lolita In Tehran', Azar Nafisi explains that for her students, the prison of oppression that Lolita finds herself in, is an every day reality for women in Iran. They found that the novel was truthful and telling of their circumstances, as they feel entrapped by their society, in which the men have complete control over them, as Humbert does over Lolita. As Judith Fetterley argues,
Reconsidering these texts in a feminist perspective and trying to find and understand the voices of the females in these texts, will encourage readers to define figures such as Lolita as a ‘molested adolescent girl’ instead of a ‘seductive one’, and understanding why the Lisbon sisters felt so entrapped, that their only way out was suicide. Elizabeth Patnoe notes that ‘our misogynistic culture created and reified a violating Lolita’[2], yet the re-violation of young girls still happens today, in every day life.
In light of the Rochdale grooming scandal in 2011, it became apparent that young girls were not listened to when they reported the horrific abuse they were subject to. Figures of authority claimed they were not reliable victims and turned a blind eye to the rapes and abuse, allowing it to continue for years until they decided to listen to the young girls and redefine them as victims. The narrative that followed their stories bears an incredible resemblance to the story of Lolita and the reception of her character to so any readers. As critics, such as Lionel Trilling, Andrew Field, Frosch and Rubinstein have incriminated Lolita, for being flirtatious, for even having sexual experience prior to Humbert’s abuse of her, the victims of the Rochdale grooming scandal were subject to the same treatment. Colleen Kennedy, in her essay, ‘The White Man’s Guest, or Why Aren’t More Feminists Reading Lolita’, concludes by saying that
Thus, I see the re-evaluation of texts such as Lolita and The Virgin Suicides as integral to understanding our culture today, to how female adolescents’ voices are still not being heard.
Again, we have seen the media paint the victims as unreliable. Mayem Bialik stated that "I still make choices every day as a 41-year-old actress that I think of as self-protecting and wise. ... I dress modestly. I don’t act flirtatiously with men as a policy" in her essay, "Mayim Bialik: Being a feminist in Harvey Weinstein’s world". Donna Karen expressed a similar sentiment, when she suggested the victims were 'asking for it'.
Like Lolita, the victims are still not being listened to properly or being defined as victims.
I concluded my dissertation with this:
At first glance, Lolita and The Virgin Suicides can be considered anti-feminist novels, due to the themes and stereotypical female roles, for example the sexualised, young girls, and the maternal, non-sexual mother role. The texts can be seen to be about the objectification and usage of young women, either viewed as passive victims, or a mysterious, enigmatic and dangerous Other. However, when analysed closely and through a gynocentric approach, it can be seen the texts only hold a mirror up to how society silences the voices of women. As Humbert finally admits to himself,
Feminist criticism represents the discovery/recovery of a voice, a unique and uniquely powerful voice capable of cancelling out those other voices… which spoke for us and to us and at us but never for us.[1]
Reconsidering these texts in a feminist perspective and trying to find and understand the voices of the females in these texts, will encourage readers to define figures such as Lolita as a ‘molested adolescent girl’ instead of a ‘seductive one’, and understanding why the Lisbon sisters felt so entrapped, that their only way out was suicide. Elizabeth Patnoe notes that ‘our misogynistic culture created and reified a violating Lolita’[2], yet the re-violation of young girls still happens today, in every day life.
In light of the Rochdale grooming scandal in 2011, it became apparent that young girls were not listened to when they reported the horrific abuse they were subject to. Figures of authority claimed they were not reliable victims and turned a blind eye to the rapes and abuse, allowing it to continue for years until they decided to listen to the young girls and redefine them as victims. The narrative that followed their stories bears an incredible resemblance to the story of Lolita and the reception of her character to so any readers. As critics, such as Lionel Trilling, Andrew Field, Frosch and Rubinstein have incriminated Lolita, for being flirtatious, for even having sexual experience prior to Humbert’s abuse of her, the victims of the Rochdale grooming scandal were subject to the same treatment. Colleen Kennedy, in her essay, ‘The White Man’s Guest, or Why Aren’t More Feminists Reading Lolita’, concludes by saying that
If reality is really a text, then texts really (re)produce reality. And feminist critics- indeed, all readers and writers- need to consider much more carefully what it is that we reproduce.[3]
Thus, I see the re-evaluation of texts such as Lolita and The Virgin Suicides as integral to understanding our culture today, to how female adolescents’ voices are still not being heard.
Again, we have seen the media paint the victims as unreliable. Mayem Bialik stated that "I still make choices every day as a 41-year-old actress that I think of as self-protecting and wise. ... I dress modestly. I don’t act flirtatiously with men as a policy" in her essay, "Mayim Bialik: Being a feminist in Harvey Weinstein’s world". Donna Karen expressed a similar sentiment, when she suggested the victims were 'asking for it'.
Like Lolita, the victims are still not being listened to properly or being defined as victims.
I concluded my dissertation with this:
I know that the hopelessly poignant thing was not Lolita’s absence from my side, but the absence of her voice from my concord. (Nabokov, p. 280)
In analysing the small, but remarkable voices, and presence the girls bring to the texts, it can be seen that the girls do try, in small rebellions, to fight back against their silencing. Yet, they are hopelessly aware of their place in society, and their voices are too small to be heard. Furthermore, it is our misogynistic culture, which seeks to further repress these voices, and pervert them, the evidence in how the very image of the Lolita has been distorted and re-violated. As Patnoe contests:
The cultural systems complicit in the cleaving and appropriation of Lolita also fuel a machinery of doubling that promotes the doubling of readers, students, molestation survivors, female sexuality, and the roles and perception of women in general.[1]
In a Guardian article entitled, ‘The horror of female adolescence and how to write about it’, Berry calls for male writers to ‘make bids to free young women from the literary occult from where they’ve been hidden’[2].
For this to happen, young women must be listened to, and believed when they voice their experiences.
It has been clear that the victims of Harvey Weinstein felt that they couldn't speak up, they were a teenage Lolita where Weinstein was Humbert, with full control of the narrative. Finally, we are coming to a time where we are not seeing what Humbert wants us to see, and overthrowing the social limitations which once prevented victims from speaking up.
It has been clear that the victims of Harvey Weinstein felt that they couldn't speak up, they were a teenage Lolita where Weinstein was Humbert, with full control of the narrative. Finally, we are coming to a time where we are not seeing what Humbert wants us to see, and overthrowing the social limitations which once prevented victims from speaking up.
[1] Elizabeth Patnoe, ‘Lolita Misrepresented,
Lolita Reclaimed: Disclosing the Doubles’, (College Literature: 1995), p. 84.
[2] Lorraine Berry,
‘The horror of female adolescence – and how to write about it’, in The Guardian (2016) Accessible at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/aug/10/horror-of-female-adolescence-literature-robin-wasserman-emma-cline
[1] Judith Fetterley, The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to
American Fiction (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978) xxiii-xxiv
[2] Elizabeth Patnoe, ‘Lolita Misrepresented,
Lolita Reclaimed: Disclosing the Doubles’, (College Literature: 1995) p. 83.
[3] Colleen Kennedy,
‘Rereading Lolita’ in Narrative and
Culture, (University of Georgia Press, 1994) p. 57.
Comments
Post a Comment