[Cynic]

I'm up pg 25.

There's a major use of the concept of color so far. No color in particular is repeating, but rather the differences between the women in their chador, likely all looking the same, and when they are in class with the chadors off and their individuality starts to truly show. One color, swimming pool blue, is mentioned, but I didn't take note of particular colors for the most part.

Also, large usage of the concept of fiction and quoting Nabokov. Not the characters of his stories, but the author himself. Keep in mind, Nabokov was scrutinized as a pedophile for writing "Lolita" even though it was fiction and in no way represented his true feelings on the subject. Sort of like the Iranian Republic incorrectly interpreting gestures of the citizens as subversive and/or un-Islamic, finding fault where no harm was ever intended.

Also, pg 24-25 categorically states: "And like Lolita, we took every opportunity to flaunt our insubordination..."

However, this is insubordination in the presence of oppression, and has a different context then, say, telling your boss to go f*** himself/herself. I think most people who read "Lolita" would agree that Humbert controlled and manipulated Lolita for his own ends. In both cases of Humbert's oppression and Iran's oppression, any act of disobedience is some fragmentary expression of freedom, because it is still the essence of individual and personal choice, even if done in secret.

EDIT: trying to make my discussion inclusive of both sides of the gender coin. I'll make additional comments as a press on into the book.