"Lolita, the light of my life, the fire of my lust, my sin, my soul." Humbert is full of love and desire for Lolita. When he indulged his perverted behavior, he was also bound by his own moral guilt. He did not have his own superhuman philosophy to excuse himself. He recognized his own sin, but he was still controlled by his own emotions. The author, Nabokov, is on the contrary. He believes that art is not "immoral" but "immoral". Nabokov seems to be not as crazy as he is. Humbert has morality. feel. Disrupting the current order is in a sense that the development of the times is inevitable, and the development of an era will always destroy some of the current old morality and old ideas. If the things of the era cannot be satisfied, it is not to adapt to promote its development, so it needs to establish a new order, then it will be destroyed and destroyed by it. As Nietzsche said, the noble man wants to create something new and a new virtue, the good man wants the old, and the old must always be preserved. Once I saw "The Outsider", so I thought that the morality of others in the world was just a backward product of stupidity and intolerance towards others. After reading "A Clockwork Orange", I think that human nature is just the same as a machine, simple domestication, good and evil are not your free will, but the product of the domesticated society. After reading Liu Cixin's "Mirror", I believe that the evil in the world is a breakthrough in the social order. This is what I once thought, but this is only from a macro perspective. It is an understatement to look at these, but the dust of each era falls on one person, as heavy as Mount Tai. Some things in the eyes of the beholder, he is just a story-like existence. But when it really happened to me, the heart-piercing pain was indescribable. Foucault once said, "Words are rights." When an immoral literary work affects children who are not yet mature, their value judgments will be so subverted. Children's thoughts are pure, and they will put their own The things and things that he comes into contact with are regarded as authority, and these immoral literature, when a child comes into contact with him, what he will appear is not a beautiful love, but just a rape like Fang Siqi, which will reappear in the world again and again. The perpetrator also has the right to justifiably say that this is a kind of high-art love that ordinary people cannot understand. Literature can write about ugliness, nothingness, and pain, but it cannot completely ignore value judgments. Like Nabokov, it completely ignores the social factors in the works and focuses only on the theme, structure, form, and style of the novel. aesthetic pleasure. Art for art's sake, taboo for taboo's sake, will only make literature a minority, and that is the real misfortune of literature. Despite this, I still feel that language and literature must not be subject to too many constraints, and should be created freely. This is just the most simple and ordinary literature. Literature is a kind of ideological deviance, and spiritual freedom soars, so I think literature can transcend morality and secular shackles. With a supportive attitude, people must maintain the freedom of thought, and society will have the power to continue to develop and move forward. But if you are an influential author, and your book is to be published, and your readers will be influenced by the opinions in your work, it is definitely not absolute freedom, but relative freedom.
View more about Lolita reviews
