quasi-chemical reaction

Bilingual by Jose Nunez.

Taking the concept of love as a chemical reaction to a higher level.

"The only aphrodisiac I need is your voice."

(aka)

Your voice triggers the secretion of endorphins

and other chemicals that make me

wanna jump you.

Lolita night

The much-anticipated screening of Lolita to my honour (by my own self) finally happened last night, and attracted the entire family much to my surprise.

Lolita's red, heart-shaped, ostentatious glasses that feature in my blog's image were absent, to my great disappointment, as the film was in black and white. Which I don't mind it's just I love those sunglasses.

So, the film vs. the book.

I kept feeling the need of filling people in about what Humbert Humbert had confessed to me through Nabokov's magnificent penmanship in the novel, stuff that couldn't be included in a film version. Either because they were too explicit, or because a film, as a study of an individual's psychology, is bound to be less in-depth than a document written by the character itself - or a novel using the premise that it is a type of journal of the central character.

James Mason however carried across the shifting thoughts and moods of Humbert excellently. Kubrick's direction made the shifts even more obvious - as in, traceable - but still subtle enough to show the interiority of his mind's processes. The 'Englishness' and vanity of Humbert Humbert were excellently portrayed, although I thought that some major scenes that shift the 'blame' of the affair towards Humbert (and are so poignant in the book, those voltas through which you escape H.H's perspective and realize that Lolita is actually tormented by their relationship) were left out. I know that Kubrick was aware of the affect censorship had on the film - he once mentioned that had he known how much of it had to be cut he would never had done it (Stanley Kubrick, A Life in Pictures) - but the part where he rocks Lolita on his knees and gets aroused or hints that show that Lolita cries every night when travelling with him I thought were essential to show the dynamic between the two characters.

As it was, Lolita, played by the gorgeous Sue Lyon, was the temptress... The scene that is supposed to show the audience how their physical relationship began went somewhat like this:

Lo: Do you wanna play a game?

HH: What game?

Lo: One that I played in camp.

HH: What do you mean?

Lo: Guess.

HH: (typically) I'm not good at guessing.

Lo: You know what game I'm talking about.

HH: (pause, terrified)

and then Lo whispers something we presume is profane in his ear - if not profane something sexual - she initiates it, it seems.

But I don't think that's what the book wanted the reader to see. Yes, the child is a manipulative brat - but she is nonetheless a child. Lyon's physical appearance of course raised the impression of Lolita's age to around 15 or 16, making the whole affair less of a shock and more of a "she was asking for it" thing.

The end, I believe, hit a perfect balance. When HH visits Lolita's home and she is pregnant, Kubrick and his cast succeed in capturing what I felt the book captured in those final scenes. She is above him, and although only 17 she controls him and is more in control than him. Humbert Humbert breaks down in tears - the grand male in his grand, old world coat with his big fat cheque - while Lolita asks him not to. A reversal of an earlier scene when Lolita is bawling after finding out her mother was dead and Humbert nurses her in his arms, half-father half-lover, and asks her to "Try to stop crying"?

Peter Sellers' role as Clare Quilty was good - a dark side of Sellers - but too much. Clare Quilty is a big part of the novel but not THAT big. I didn't feel like a one-man-show by Sellers was needed. His speeches dragged on a bit. And although the first scene of the film (and last basic scene of the novel) was excellent, with Peter Sellers showing Quilty's decadent, even perverse side, it established an underlying theme of Humbert vs. Quilty that took on a greater dimension than I expected. The novel is not about Humbert's manhood vs. Quilty's - its more about what goes on in HUmbert's head and between him and Lolita - and so I thought that that interpretation compromised the subtlety of the film and shifted attention from the central locus of the novel.

tropical topical

The light woke me up, at 9am. I can't stand the light when I dream, it washes out all the pictures and the prolonged oblivion we call sleep.

Three hours before this unpleasant wake up call I had been juggling my aces, kings and queens, but what combination could change the final outcome?

Which I didn't expect to be waking up at 9am. In any case, there we were, lying in sweat and on green sheets, with bronchitis passing to and fro between us. Apparently we made each other ill.

...

Ill with love, baby

I knew you'd come for me, Frank. Even if it was in the shape of bacteria.

American crime novels have gotten into our heads.