As the author states early on, reading Lolita is a celebration, "an active withdrawal from a reality that had turned hostile," it is triumph against a regime that controls every aspect of peoples lives. It is a sense of "longing for the ordinary, " of her students that the author describes so well. the things that we take for granted. Against this backdrop, the weekly meetings are an act of defiance and you find yourself drawn into this inner sanctum and hoping that the meetings are not discovered and abandoned. Her students are victims but there is also dignity amongst the despair, i.e they laugh and talk and the meetings seem like a world apart from everything that is happening outside of these four walls. However, the students also discuss their personal situations and problems and you are reiminded of where they are depsite the sense of "escape." It's not really an escape as they all have to go back to their lives after the meetings. But it is escapism.

...
[Edited 2/2/05 2:59am]

bkw said:

Where is Martina!?

Lleena said:

Escapism in oppose to escape!! Yes!!

2the9s said:

I agree with Lleena's comment about it being "escapism," if we use that word with qualifications and recognizing that this escapism became something more, but I also wanted to clarify my own statement about it being a call to arms. I don't think the two points of view are incompatible.

Just to support again the view of the book as escapism: remember at the very beginning (I think it was the first page, I don't have my book today) there is a boy who sort of lurks outside where they have the reading group. It's one of the males they respect and who is sympathetic to their problems and also desirous of learning more. But they don't allow him in because he's male. This struck me as being an example of how they were just as caught up in the same gender divisions of their society as anyone. It seemed like the group was escapist from the structure of this society with out being constructive. Understanably so, but still.

And the portrayal of many of the males in the book seemed cartoonish, even as the portayals of the girls was becoming more distinct and individual. The escape took place as much in how these women saw the outside world as it did in the fact that they were defying custom by being there at all. (This is why the portrait of that fanataical muslim student who committs suicide at the end of the James chapter was so powerful to me. She actually made him human without symapthizing with what he stood for.)

But it's also a call to arms because the overriding message here seems to be that this society is intolerable, and literal "escape" or death are the only recourses that women have. (Which sort of brings us back around to bkw's point about Nasiri's own "escape" at the end). This book seems more directed at the West than anything, and not western academic liberals. (At times it reminded me of Rebecca West's Black Lamb and Grey Falcon a book written on the eve of WWII, and which was explicitly a crticism of Britain's pacifist liberal intellectuals and a call to arms to fight the growing Nazi threat.)

Lleena said:

I like that phrase.

Not done yet, but I am finding it difficult to get through also... but so far I agree also with the "escapism" comment. There is also the question of "liberation" and what that means

I read the first two pages..

I am so super busy right now.. Lleena!!!!!

sag10 said:

Bring the cowbell, baby girl!

When is it coming out in paperback?

July said:

It already is!!

2the9s said:[quote]

2the9s said:

So, do you think that Nasiri cops out by leaving?

why am I always SO LATE to the party?



I JUST got the book today

I will get into a bit and then come back and see what peeps are sayin on this here thread...

Sorry to disappoint, but I've started the book about 3 times now and just can't get into it.
I'll have to force myself one of these days.

CarrieMpls said:

Co-sign on that - I am forging my way but admit to having reread a page or two... or three...

bkw said:

Good question (and now I know the ending?!)

DiminutiveRocker said:

I assume people realise she didnt write this book in Iran, and she points out fairly early that she was in Iran til 1997.

I know you're probably just kidding around but I'm just pointing out that I was concious of ruining the ending when i posed the question, but figured that it doesn't, it's all about the journey.

bkw said

I am...
[Edited 2/2/05 18:14pm]

DiminutiveRocker said:

I've been here in Teheran for weeks now, sitting by the
hotel pool, reading "Lolita".

Where the hell are all the other bookclubbers? Did y'all
miss your flight?

was this assigned Org homework ?


i hate when i skip school







.

I forgot! Been busy w/ school & jobs...I have to get on the ball!!
I guess I lost my kiss from 9's

bkw said:

heh As you can tell I've been avoiding this question...

I don't think it's a copout, although there does seem to be some rationalization that has been going on there. She has sort of told herself throughout, or made it seem inevitable, that leaving was the right and only thing to do.

When she tells her friend the Magician though, his reaction is supportive and yet at the same time he says that he will never be in touch with her again, and I think that held true.

He seems to realize more than she does the severity of what it means to leave your country especially when it is in such bad shape.

2the9s said:

I knew I could get you to answer the question if I kept the heat on.

I dont consider it a cop out either and I would have left the country too, even though it is selfish in some ways. She also has young children that she has a responsibility to, although she doesn't use that as an excuse.

It is food for thought though.

I just got the book...waiting for the STICKY YEA! Hopefully get a start in the next couple of days and join the conversation....have to avoid the thread if I read too much on the thread I won't read the book! Thanks Llena...

Mach said:

I just got this book. Can't wait to get started

Is this a book?

althom said:

I haven't finished the book yet. I liked the chapter on Gatsby. I thought the mock trial that was conducted in the class with the author representing herself as the book was interesting. The student defending Gatsby against the accusations levelled at it as a defender of immorality, greed etc was very good.

The author points out that Gatsby is about the damaging power of wealth and the fragile nature of dreams and how in the pursuit of his ideals Gatsby destroys himself. The author likens this to her own situation, "how similar our fate was to Gatsby's. He wanted to fulfill his dream by repeating the past, and in the end he discovered that the past was dead, the present a sham, and there was no future."

Lleena said:

It sounds like a definate call against conservatism (and fundamentalism of course). The world is full of people who want to stop pogress, go back in time, and repeat what was done before. Very much like Australia's current government

BTW, whyis this no longer a sticky?

bkw said:

I agree, and also the weird demonization of anything remotely liberal or Western or modern it's all so eeeeevil.