Reading Lolita in Tehran, by Azar Nafisi

[stingo]

As discussed in this thread, this will be the first book to be discussed by the online book club. To give people time to acquire the book, the "official" discussion will start in a week, BUT if people have already gotten it, feel free to discuss anything from Part One ("Lolita"). Next week will start the official discussion of Part One (January 21st), with Part Two discussion commencing on this thread the week after (January 28th). Please feel free to ask questions/make comments about the current or preceding parts of the book, but PLEASE do NOT post anything from subsequent parts. (That is, if we're discussing Part 3 - or up to page 231 - anything up to and including that is fair game. Anything after that is off limits.

That said, if you're behind in the reading but still read the thread, there could very possibly be spoilers posted, so just be aware of that.

To start the ball rolling, why do you think Lolita was chosen as the first book discussed by Nafisi's group? What do you think of the choice? What would you have started with and why?

[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.

[stingo]

Ah good, a first customer! Yes, Nafisi makes a point of color differentiating each of the members of her group, particularly after they've shed their uniform black.

I think another general theme here is the relationship of fiction to reality. Various incidents that she relates both in Nabokov's writings and things she's experienced are dovetailed together quite well. To her credit, she doesn't shove our noses into it, but rather leads us to the place and lets us draw our conclusions (deliberately being vague here until the official discussion starts on Monday).

As for the oppression, I think I'll wait to hear some of the female participants for their views. Speaking for myself, it's certainly consciousness opening to hear a first hand story of what it's like to live under those conditions. Hearing it on the news is one thing, but reading/hearing it in a more personal context I think is very different.

I'm very much enjoying the book so far as I find it to be very well written, even if a bit on the slow side every so often.

[Cynic]

Originally Posted by stingo

(deliberately being vague here until the official discussion starts on Monday).

As am I. I'm drawing attention to certain themes so people can make a point of them.

As for the oppression, I think I'll wait to hear some of the female participants for their views.

Tom, if I misunderstood the sentiment of this paragraph, I apologize.

I think the difference between a woman living in America and a woman living in Tehran is going to be too significant to be...bridgable. What can we as middle class white Americans really know about the the ideology, the culturaly based instincts for survival...any of that? When Azar Nafisi wrote the book, I don't think she intended to convey Sanaz's world as she walked home (pg 26-27) to a solely male audience, but rather to non-Iranian people in general.

The best we can do is to remain receptive.

[stingo]

Originally Posted by Cynic

I think the difference between a woman living in America and a woman living in Tehran is going to be too significant to be...bridgable. What can we as middle class white Americans really know about the the ideology, the culturaly based instincts for survival...any of that? When Azar Nafisi wrote the book, I don't think she intended to convey Sanaz's world as she walked home (pg 26-27) to a solely male audience, but rather to non-Iranian people in general.

Indeed - the origins of my thoughts are as you describe them - what can I, as an American (or any other non-Islamic nationality) male know of this culture. So in that sense I would defer to women, as I believe women of whatever culture would have a closer connection to the people in the book. Why? Because what's described in the book is an extreme, yes, but it's also an extreme along a line of control as to what women should wear, and how women should act that extends into supposedly enlightened nations. (Waif-thin anorexic models anyone?)

And I also agree, Nafisi's (to her credit) not writing this for men or women, but as my previous text should indicate, women, could/should have a more intuitive understanding/empathy for the book.

Does this help?

[Cynic]

absolutely

[Alcoholiday]

sorry, i'm probably out for this book with the reading load for school. MAYBE i'll be able to hit up next book.

[stingo]

Originally Posted by Alcoholiday

sorry, i'm probably out for this book with the reading load for school. MAYBE i'll be able to hit up next book.

That's fine - you know you can comment on the themes in the book as they're developed in the discussion - if you wanted to do that.

[Cynic]

Originally Posted by stingo

I think another general theme here is the relationship of fiction to reality.

Perhaps a sense of unreality of the situation? How unreal can a government be before people start to object? Or perhaps a feeling of the surreal, as in "this can't be happening."

Another thought on the use of fiction, is the delusionary (somewhat rhyming with illusory) approach the Iranian Republic has toward protecting the public good?

forgot the book at home today, so no reading until tomorrow.

[L'ilJ]

Hey guys. I've read the first two sections (Lolita and Gatsby) so far. I am really, really enjoying it. I have to say it was a bit slow at first, but things really start to get interesting in the second section. I'm going to gather my thoughts and jump into the discussion tomorrow.

[Cynic]

Bring it babe.

[stingo]

Just remember we're still on Lolita through this week and next. And of course, welcome back.

[L'ilJ]

Originally Posted by stingo

Just remember we're still on Lolita through this week and next. And of course, welcome back.

Of course! Usually I'm not one to be ahead on the reading. I just happened to start this while on vacation this week. I'm hoping to actually finish as much as I can this weekend because once I'm back at work I have a lot less time to read.

[stingo]

Originally Posted by L'ilJ

Of course! Usually I'm not one to be ahead on the reading. I just happened to start this while on vacation this week. I'm hoping to actually finish as much as I can this weekend because once I'm back at work I have a lot less time to read.

That you read that much of it while on vacation, I'm guessing you are liking it. I'll look forward to reading your thoughts on it.

[stingo]

Well the day's finally here - official discussion on Part I begins today. Please post any of your views, questions comments about that part. I'll be looking forward to the discussion.

[sveta]

Originally Posted by stingo

To start the ball rolling, why do you think Lolita was chosen as the first book discussed by Nafisi's group? What do you think of the choice? What would you have started with and why?

I don’t think there’s too much left to guess work here…You’ve got to pick a book that’s thought-provoking and evokes emotional response on a personal level. “The desperate truth of the confiscation of one individual’s life by another”, Lolita is the story the girls can relate to; they don’t know “what Lolita would have become if Humbert had not engulfed her”; neither do they know what would have become of themselves, had they lived in a different world, but that’s what they’re trying to uncover.
Just like Lolita, they’re deprived of “pleasures of ordinary life” and lack their history, which became “immaterial” with the new regime. But it’s not just about the girls. Their personal sorrows and joys resonate with something indefinitely larger, as Nafisi applies Lolita’s “desperate truth” to the whole country; the country deprived of the past and “pinned to the wall”; the country fixed in a still life mode, surrendered to what sounds like dystopia…
Am I digging too deep here? Somebody stop me!