In 1955,
The book stirred controversy by describing, and some claim celebrating, the relationship between a pedophile and a young girl. Unlike some other ''shocking'' novels that tend to mellow with age, ''Lolita'' still troubles. The subject remains abhorrent: society rejects such relationships, no matter how manipulative (or complicit) the victim may be, no matter how celebrated the book may become.
Time magazine named ''Lolita'' one of the 100 Best English-Language Novels from 1923 to the present. In its original 1958 review of the novel, Time said: ''But the most truly horrible part of the book is the intimate fashion in which the reader is made to see how from a monstrous relationship a kind of shadow of a good life emerges.'' Scholars have also noted the conflicting feelings readers have about the novel and its protagonist. In his book, ''Vladimir Nabokov,'' Donald Morton tells us: ''What makes 'Lolita' something more … is the truly shocking fact that Humbert Humbert is a genius who, through the power of his artistry, actually persuades the reader that his memoir is a love story.'' While some may be able to appreciate the literary nature of the book and the talent of its writer, most of us are repulsed by the relationship at the book's core.
Renee A. James This message of revulsion vs. ''art'' never reached a certain British furniture company and a retailer until it was too late. BBC reported that British retailer Woolworths created controversy when it offered a new line of bedroom furniture for young girls called the ''Lolita Midsleeper Combi.'' The Lolita system contained a bed, a desk and a cupboard, designed for girls around the age of 6. That all sounds perfectly lovely, but what was the company who named this combination of furniture thinking? And what was Woolworths thinking when they agreed to offer it for sale?
Turns out, they weren't thinking at all. An online group called raisingkids.co.uk brought the depraved connection between the bedroom furniture and its colorful name to the attention of Woolworths. Calling it ''unbelievably bad taste,'' their protest resulted in Woolworths removing the product from its Web site. Catherine Hanly, the editor of the parenting Web site, commented, ''It has become a name that is synonymous with sexual precocity and the fact that it is tied to a girl's bed -- it literally couldn't be in worse taste.''
Rather lamely, Woolworths claimed that its Web site staff ''had no idea'' of the connotation of Lolita. Given the precious little time most people dedicate to reading these days, whether its popular fiction or a classic novel, this very well could be true. Once they learned it, they withdrew the product.
It's equally hard to understand how a furniture manufacturer could choose ''Lolita'' as the name for a young girl's bed? Why not Grace or Ruby or Olivia, the most popular girls' names in the U.K.? Woolworths stated that it would follow up with the manufacturer to learn the nature of this ''branding.'' Clearly, no one on the marketing team had a clue that the brand name ''Lolita'' would be even remotely inappropriate for a young girl's bedroom furniture.
On the other hand, Woolworths could have created a market niche had it paired the furniture with an underwear line called ''Little Miss Naughty.'' Never heard of it? It features padded bras and underwear for girls -- as young as 7 years old -- based on a cartoon character in the U.K. Parents who want to give their daughters a head start on a life of iniquity could buy them their underwear and furniture in one place.
Shakespeare asked: ''What's in a name?'' Answer: a lot. In fact, some names transcend their origins. America is filled with thousands of 30-something women named Jennifer 30-something years after a publishing and movie phenomenon called ''Love Story.'' But unless I'm sadly mistaken, ''Lolita'' conjures up a somewhat less admirable, less sympathetic character. Why would a bedroom furniture company want to keep it alive?
Renée A. James lives in