I confess, I only read Lolita once, & that was quite some time ago. According to James Hardy, who studied with Nabokov, & Ann Martin, Nabokov recommended reading a book at least twice. Those were some of the best parts of "Light of My Life"-when the authors shared details of studying with Nabokov, his teaching methods, the books he taught. There were other parts, particularly in the footnotes, that seemed a little too wacky for a scholarly study-"These are obvious allusions. Time for a reach. Could this be the ghost of Annabelle future? Normally we wouldn't ask, but Nabokov is tricky." These interjections, along with references to films (many films, but not Kubrick's Lolita), seemed a litte off-kilter. I wasn't sure if the author's were going for a populist approach, but it made for some unusual reading. There were also a couple of offensive comments, such as "No woman could ever forget Humbert's virility, which acted as these things always must, as a paean of praise to a woman's desirability"-so, rape is a compliment? Other than these points, & the fact that Quilty seems under-explained as a character, this was a serviceable study of the book. Perhaps if I had recently read Lolita, I would have gotten more out of it. ( )

This book has two authors. I presume that each worked on each every page since I could not discern any style shift throughout the whole 194 pages (+index). This work is more in line with comparative literature than a strict academic piece. I was pleased that the authors had such an exact reading of the text. It made following the authors’ arguments, which are fairly involved, easy to compare.
The main thesis is that “Lolita” is a parable, not an allegory. It is a moral tale which shows how destructive unchecked eros can be in a person without a real human conscience. The authors of “Light of My Life” try to direct attention toward appreciating Nabokov’s craft in how he structured the novel. The authors take pains to show that “Lolita” was made to be read and reread over and again. This circular pattern had to do with Humbert’s own view of how eros had to take its course.
The authors become more openly critical of Humbert as the book progresses. No one would bother to read very far if they didn’t withhold judgment of the main character until the final conclusions. The first two thirds of the book deal with technical aspects of Humbert and how he functions within the novel. The last section delivers a clear and excellent summation of Humbert and how he manipulates all he comes in contact with.
There are a few things which appear axiomatic to the authors which are not so in the text. The authors hold that Annabel was the real focus of Humbert’s life and that Lolita was the closest approximation he could find in real life. The second is that Humbert has been sufficiently punished by imprisonment and death. The book has an explicit moral to impart and that was it. This conclusion by the authors is based upon Nabokov’s teaching lectures, not on the text. When pressed as to why Nabokov does not say as much in the Afterword, they reply that, there, he was more interested in narrative framing. He is said to be distancing himself from disclosing any authorial intent.
To my mind, when compared with other despicable literary characters (Shakespeare’s Richard III, Machiavelli’s Cesar Borgia, Dante’s Brunetto Latini, Chaucer’s Summoner and Friar) they all have a moral downfall. Humbert’s downfall is to be arrested for a murder he committed but not for what happened with Lolita. So to my reading the moral, in the text, is weak and therefore pales in comparison with other grander parables of moral weakness. The author’s rely on an Augustinian view of life and conversion through enlightenment. They assert that Humbert receives no enlightenment, and that is the moral. That is Humbert's ambivalent ambiguity.
This book requires some attention and so is not a quick read. The writing is excellent and the authors made connections with French literature I had no previous familiarity with. If you can stomach reading “Lolita”, this work will help clarify the direction of the novel. ( )

“Light of My Life” by James D. Hardy Jr. and Ann Martin speaks of love, time and memory in Nabokov’s book Lolita. When I received this book through Early Readers in LibraryThing, I read Lolita. While reading Lolita I was in turn set off my routine by the Foreword and then the body of the book left me wondering if this was an autobiography, confession, explanation for a life of deviant behavior. Throughout the author describes his feelings, physical attractions and behaviors. He had a consistent condescending attitude towards everyone and all cultures around him. Though he is not a gentleman in any sense, this story is about him alone. I became caught in a tale that was doomed to failure. The only question was how the failure was to occur. The Afterword, written by a third author brings the book to a close, but so many views, attitudes and emotions arose while I read Lolita that the end left me more exhausted than feeling completion.
Enter “Light of My Life”. The plan of the book is straightforward. The authors, literature professors at Louisiana State University, follow Lolita from Foreword through Afterword evaluating the topics of love, time and memory in the main character, Humbert Humbert and the construction of the story. With the recent reading of Lolita, and my questions and feelings still fresh, this book was enlightening. Beginning with Humbert’s attitudes towards life, particularly his attitudes towards women, Humbert and his failure to mature as a man suddenly became clear. The book educates the reader in classic concepts of love and then shows how Humbert did not grow. Humbert builds a complete psyche surrounding the rightness of his attitudes and actions, even to citing historical events to prove his behavior is right in some way. “Light of My Life” continues in this manner, analyzing each event in Lolita. How Humbert’s life is driven by his sexuality, with little energy to attain anything else is a consistent theme the authors reiterate throughout the book. They also discuss Nabokov’s attachment to aspects of the story and to the main character, Humbert.
“Light of My Life” was enjoyable to read from two aspects. First the ideas and how they played out in the story were well presented. Moments reading “Light of My Life” brought moments of, “Ah-ha” from me as what I had felt or questioned when reading Lolita was clear now. For example, I knew Humbert was not a gentleman, but couldn’t quite describe the thought. Second, I found the writing, as promised in the foreword, easily readable, still communicating complex ideas. I left reading “Light of My Life” with a much greater appreciation of Lolita and Nabokov’s skill as a novelist. I am certain I will read Lolita again. This book is a 4.5 star book. ( )

I got this book as part of the Early Readers Review Group and, while I'm sure this is my own fault, it certainly wasn't the kind of book i would normally pick up to read. All I can say is that I must have read the description incorrectly.

Written by two academics a Louisiana State University, this book is an in-depth look at Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita and as such offers interesting insights into the character of the narrator, Humbert Humbert. And much as I enjoyed reading the novel, I really wasn't interested in almost 200 pages of its deconstruction.

In the interest of being fair to the program, and because the book was free, I plowed on through it. But it was a chore and one that I don't want to repeat. ( )