Tfw Nabokov got away with being a blatantly massive paedophile

William S. Burroughs shot his wife in the head.

I could say the same about you. I don't have any proof you're not a pedophile.

user, that one's true, you're missing the point of the thread
JK Rowling uses her gay magical powers to fuck centaurs in a teacher outfit

jstor.org/stable/40754944

You can read the short story from Russian. Penguin have it as The Enchanter.

So did Goethe, John Ruskin and Allen Ginsberg

You don't actually mean this is conclusive proof that Nabokov was a pedophile? All I can read of this article published by some kid named Brandon 30 years after Nabokov died is the cover page. Not about to spend my pittance on some idiot making wild inferences from literary errata.

If you've read it and do believe it conclusively makes its case, then you must be able to discuss its findings itt.

>some idiot
nice projection

>quoting something not present as projection
Paging Dr Freud.
I'd give him the article because right now he seems the reasonable one, since he might be able to tell the difference between words that say "idiot" and words that do not say "idiot".

Pardon me being bored by his "Shakespeare was black"-tier thesis.

I'll repeat myself. All I'm looking for is concrete proof Nabokov is a pedophile, and just because there's a published thesis saying he is doesn't mean that he is. If there is something in there then surely you're able to bring it to light in this thread.

Can we have an intelligent conversation? Or would you rather go in circles?

>Can we have an intelligent conversation?
I don't know what do you want to talk about.

There's also Laughter in the Dark. Not as pedo-ish/about the girl's age (she is young, though, about 16). Nabokov was a (lower-case r) romantic. He just chose to write about perverted love/attraction. Mary, The Enchanter, King, Queen, Knave, Glory, Transparent Things, Lolita, Ada, Lolita. Even Pale Fire is about perverted love (Kimbote's for Shade). That's what Nabokov does -- writes about love and insanity. Of course there's all the tricks he has. But at the core of all his work is love.

Edgy for the sake of edginess.

tfw Cormac McCarthy got away with being a blatant sociopath and war criminal and serial killer who scalped several hundred Mexicans in the 1850s and glorified war above all else

>I don't know what you want to talk about

I'll recap what we were talking about.

>OP/You, thesis: Nabokov is a pedophile
>me, antithesis: Nabokov is not a pedophile, you have no proof
>retort: article to an undergrad's essay
>me: this article is inaccesible without me spending money, surely you are a reasonable man and your stance is based on evidence. Present your evidence.
>You: ajduf8sjs ur an idiot holy shit I don't have an argument blah blah what are we even talking about?

That's a short and rather uneventful conversation. I don't' know how much there would be to say about it.

>his prose was so brilliant it was convincing
>he must be a paedo

Wonderful!

lrn2reed

You could say "I was wrong to assert that Vladimir Nabokov was a pedophile".

I right reckon I could.

Tolkien threw a gold ring into a volcano.

That is true. Here's some other things I could say:

"Karl Marx was a crocodile, but Engels wasn't."

"April is the cruellest bitch (in my class)."

"Kant's pronouncement that there has been no innovations in logic was wrong, even at his time."

"New Public Management really put those filthy proles in their place."

"Some more crisp bread please!"

Post this evidence then. No one here's about to pay for access to this thing so if you want to use it to make your case show us what it says.

>gets btfo
>changes rethoric without acknowledging it

All she had to do was listen

Dude, just admit it. You want to suck me off.

These people are not me.

m8, I'd love to see him get BTFO but you haven't posted any evidence you have. He's not changing tack, he's asking you for the article which you claim has evidence. You're acting like one of those trannies who mention they're a grill and then don't want to show off their shitty boobjob.

This faggot isn't me, please ignore him, and you stfu.

As for all you faggots, let me put this straight. I POSTED a fucking ESSAY that you can read for a few fucking dollars if you really want to, conclusively proving that Nabokov is a fucking pedophile. What do you have? Tiny penises? LOL, get a fucking life, losers.

Pic related, it's me after I fucked your bitch. :^)

>inb4 I'm trolling
I'm just not a passive faggot like you assholes :^)

>shilling your own article
Yeah, you have no proof, enjoy your debts.

>>his prose was so brilliant it was convincing
>>he must be a paedo
>I show that this wasn't what the article said at all
>not btfo

>don't want to show off their shitty boobjob
I'm acting like a sensible person?

That's not me. You can tell by the writing style.

He asked you to show the other evidence the article relies on, the evidence it specifies is not the first part of your greentext.

Is your brain broken or some shit that it thinks follow up questions are all the original question? I even want you to win, but you need to do more than being a retard and providing no evidence for me to think you're even capable of competing.

>competing
It's not a competition. Calm down.

It's not like Lolita is his only pedo book. There's some super hot child sex in Ada

I'm fucking done with this thread. Let me make it clear that a bunch of assholes are pretending to be me, I'm not posting anymore.

These are my posts
Anyway, I'm done. See you later, losers.

>implying I'm paying to find out
>implying your clickbait is better than the clickbait which brings me actual pedo shit
Okay, I assume you don't have shit by way of evidence and probably haven't even read the article yourself since you couldn't screenshot the relevant evidence. Nabokov goes back to "definitely not a pedo because someone would have produced evidence by now", and everything was as before. Good luck with the rest of them buying your crap.

He also called Lewis Carroll the original Humbert Humbert, and he didn't mean it disparagingly.

It's not my paper. It doesn't even look like you can buy it.

well, since we can't read that, ever read the boy who cried wolf?

I have not.

Pity

Why?

Cuz the main character's a little bitch like you, pussy. Fight me IRL

I don't read for identification anyway, pleb.

o-ok sorry.

What do you mean with "got away with"?

There is no reason to not let somebody "get away with" being a pedophile, as long as that person isn't actually a child molester.

Yeah mate, that short story is available.
Has one of the best closing lines i've ever read btw.
His son translated it to English and provided a foreword.

Satan be gone