Customer Reviews

Lo's Diary

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

If you really want to read it, you probably will end up doing so. I read an uncomplimentry review of the book in the Washington Post, but proceeded to buy and read the book anyway. I think the concept is what is so intruiging - who has read Lolita and not wondered what was going on through little Lo's head the entire time? But having read Lo's Diary I found it terribly dissapointing, so unimaginative and lacking in great prose - especially compared to Lolita! - that it becomes worthless. I read the entire thing, and although there were a few good parts (the part that is quoted on the back of the book is one of the few exceptional lines) there is truly nothing in it that sheds any more light on Lolita.

I'm amused by everyone who read this thinking it was going to be as good as the original and is now enraged. I got this thinking it would be "fun trash" and I was pleasantly surprised to find a Lolita (or Dolores, because that's what she goes by herself) who is intelligent and witty, tough and bright.

The beginning is the best part and I found myself dreading the moment Humbert would come along and help her pound the final nail in her childhood. But of course he does, and she seduces him, proving that for all her precociousness she is really just a brash, flirtatious child with no ability to foresee consequences. I think that her reactions once she's realized how she's trapped herself ring true. I agree her narrative sounds too adult, but the emotions involved feel real. She goes from vaguely hoping they can make it work, to bored resignation, to suicidal fantasies, then back to bored resignation - only this time with an eye toward the future.

She is not a particularly likeable girl, but I found her touching and interesting. And she IS a victim of the adult world - she is just determined to survive it. In her eyes, Humbert's failure is not that he's a pedophile, but that he's a hypocritical coward. I think "Lolita" could very well have been the person portrayed here.

If you think the real, original Lolita is too sacred to be defiled by reading this version then you definitely should not waste your time. But if you are curious and you can come to terms with writing that is certainly below Nabokov (though not bad) then go for it.

Actually I shouldn't be surprised by all the broo-haha circling
over this book. It was bound to happen sooner or later and I don't think this was a badly done job. The complaints are either it's too smart for a 12 year old to write, or too dumb for a derivative of VN's caliber. Either way it doesn't matter. It's fiction. If you want reality read the diary of people living or having lived. This isn't it. If you want VN he has left plenty of work to enjoy. The louder you bash on something the more attraction you give it. In the literal sense of the word this book is very attractive.

This, of course, is not Nabokov writing, so it's going to be unlike his writing, which is, as many fans understand, marvelous. Pia Pera, though not as incredible, is marvelous in her own right and just that she had the guts to get this through to a wide audience is enough to give her a nod (or a raspberry if that's all you can accomplish). There's obviously something to it if it's gotten this far. But no it's not Nabokov, so leave it at that.

As for a twelve year old never being able to use language of this kind try reading The History Of Luminous Motion by Scott Bradfield and tell me if a ten year old boy could use language like that. Maybe if snobbish "grown-ups" would get off their high horses and stop laughing at young people who use big words they'd find out kids can be a great deal more intellegent than anyone gives them credit for. They can use language like this and do. So get over that (while remembering the definition of the word "fiction") and I'm sure you'll enjoy this book, if it's mere elements strike your fancy.

OK, I'm just going to tell you a brief summary and what I thought.

This books foreward tells the story of how the author of the book supposedly got the diary of Dolores Maze a.k.a Lolita Haze. The book itself is written as if narrated, not so much is tranditional diary form. I felt the language was a little too mature for Lolita who grows from 12-15 while "writing" this diary. Other than that it tells the story of her life with her mother "the hen" before and after Humbert. It discusses why she got involved with him, what kind of a man she REALLY felt he was, and also sheds a lot of light on what kind of a girl SHE really was!
I enjoyed this book a lot. It was like a roller coaster ride with a manic-depressive. It was not as well written as "Lolita" of course, however, I did find myself dying to know what she would do or say next. Some parts I had trouble handling. If you are an animal lover watch out for the hamster scene, and if you don't like foul language this book isn't for you. I found myself squirming a little when I read her descriptions of sexual acts. Nabokov was delicate with these descriptions, where Lolita's rough American rebel side shows through.
To wrap this up I'm just going to say I liked this book. My mom would kill me if she knew I read it but I liked it a lot. I felt like I was actually there where as with Humberts point of view I felt more like he was telling me about it. I enjoyed this more relaxed style of writing as well,it made it a fast and enjoyable read and you didn't find yourslef looking for Nabokovs clever word games. Try it out.

I wanted to love this book and hoped it would be worthy of its origins. It is not. However, it is an entertaining piece of fluff with none of the merits of Nabokov's "Lolita". The prose is not at all believable as the words of a teenager and there was little of the girlishness of the "real" Lolita. Still, I have to admit, I read it in one sitting as one does with any mindless book. Pia Pera had a brilliant concept, but she blew it. The Foreward by Dmitri Nabokov is warning enough. So, if you can put your purist literary opinions aside, this is a fun read.

I just finished this, and I hate to say that I am disappointed. From the language in the book, I found it hard to believe that Lo was just twelve years old. This story gave the impression that the author had forgotten what it was like to be a child. Instead of writing in the mind of a child, I get the impression that the author read a "How To" on being a child and drafted her work based on that. I realize that Lo was sophisticated for her age, but some of her vocabulary was just too advanced for a twelve year old. Further, the style of writing was so tedious to read that I found myself wanting to skip through paragraphs.

I just finished Lo's Diary last night, and my reaction from page one was purely delight that Pia Pera was able to so perfectly give voice to Lolita. I think this is the best example of a continuum of a familiar story that I have ever read. In my opinion, Ms. Pera is quite successful in her portrayal of Lo as a misguided but intelligent nymphet who knows exactly what she is doing, yet is too hardened to have any idea that she is being cheated and used.

I fell in love with her character, in the sense that she needed so desperately to be loved. Although I don't possess a degree in psychology, I think it is clear that Humbert, Filthy and Lo are all perfectly drawn profiles of the pedophile, the troubled and desperate child, and the hedonist. I would rush to the nearest bookstore to read a further account of Lo's life if Pia Pera ever decided to carry on with her interpretation.

this review, i'm afraid, is going to be redundant, however i am compelled to purge myself of the remorse of having willingly brought into my home this Crime Against Nature, this most tremendously unfortunate waste of paper, print, this unpardonable offence to prose, poetry, all that is good, light, true. ok, i'll admit right now that i wasn't exactly unbiased... like many other readers i was frenetically opposed, indeed "not favourably impressed" by the prospect of some impudent italian attempting to narrate a negative, to mirror-write nabokov's polished gem. and yet, i never considered -not- reading it, for the simple and pathetic point of fact that though "lolita" is a perfect work of art, whole to itself, i still ache when my eyes pass over the final passages... even after the news of humbert's death the soap-opera-fetishist in me wants the story to go on in some way, to endure progress unravel beyond my own time. not so much because the characters invoke my sympathy or anything, but because it is such a singularly beautiful work that i hate to see it end. it was that minuscule part of me that desperately wanted to -enjoy- lo's diary. it was a chance to perpetuate in my mind this marvelous Thing nabokov created so many years ago, in a place that i would later call my alma mater. ALAS... it far surpassed my expectations. every additional word i absorb is an insult to everything i hold dear about "lolita," and about nabokov, period. (it's no little crime that the author, on repeated occasion, attempts to dapple her narrative with pninisms... *SHUDDER*) so, here it is and there you are. no amount of ill remarks could have dissuaded me from purchasing this book, all the same, it's difficult for me not to think on the great many litres of bourbon, the dental care, the miles of electrical tape i could have purchased had i not decided to oblige my sappy sentimental side, instead. so just you take care, potential buyers... consider yourselves sufficiently forewarned.

This book was a waste of my money and is not worth my time to review.

If you buy it, you'll regret it. Trust me.

I find it exceedingly pompous of Pia Pera to fancy herself a master of prose comparable to Nabokov. Reading "Lolita" itself alongside "Lo's Diary" shows that Pera, for the most part, fails miserably in her attempt to shed new insight into the character of Dolores Maze (aka Haze.) In addition, the aforementioned maturity of voice lends incredulity to the book, as no authentic twelve-year-old, no matter how precocious, could write a diary with language like that. All in all the book was a letdown, though it does get deliciously catty at times. Its beginning chapters shone above its dreary middle and ultimately dull denouement.