|
I
bought the book for the title, and because it was billed as a memoir
in books. Lolita was forbidden to us in our growing years, when
we were charting through literary terrain. Any mention of it still
brings back memories of the thrill of trying to read the book on
the sly back in the 1960s. In Iran in the late 1990s, women, some
my age and some much younger, were still reading Lolita under covers.
This book, among others, was banned as 'immoral' by the Iranian
government, and could no longer be taught in the university.
The book opens with Nafisi, a literature professor and expert
on the Russian writer Nabokov, being forced to leave the university
where she teaches due to her refusal to wear the hijab. Not willing
to give up on her passion for English literature, she brings together
seven of her most promising female students and sets up literature
classes in her home. Here they gather each week for two years, (1995-'97),
to discuss books and authors, and to try make sense of their own
lives through that of the fictional characters. Lolita, Invitation
to a Beheading, the Great Gatsby, Huckleberry Finn, Daisy Miller,
Pride and Prejudice etc. are all read and discussed against the
backdrop of life in Tehran.
Through
four novelists - Nabokov, Fitzgerald, James, and Austen - and their
work, Nafisi tries to link the ideals their novels espouse to those
she and her students aspire to. In the confines of Nafisi's home
they "shed their mandatory veils and robes and burst into color."
Soon the 'book club' leads to debate on the social, cultural, and
political realities of living under authoritarian rule. Much time
is spent discussing harassment at the hands of the 'morality guards,'
the daily indignities, love, marriage, and life in general. Indeed
their conversations give readers a rare glimpse into the minds of
women who have suddenly had many things they had taken for granted
snatched away and declared immoral
For, to the author, Lolita becomes a metaphor for life in
Tehran. Nafisi sees the truth in Lolita's story as the appropriation
of one individual's life by another. She writes, " The parallel
to women's lives is clear: we had become the figment of someone
else's dreams
We were not Lolita, the Ayatolla was not Humbert
and this republic was not what Humbert called his princedom by the
sea. Lolita was not a critique of the Islamic Republic, but it went
against the grain of all totalitarian perspectives."
Nafisi's
students use Lolita, and the other books as lenses through which
they can view their own situations: "There, in that living
room, we rediscovered that we were also living, breathing human
beings; and no matter how repressive the state became, no matter
how intimidated and frightened we were, like Lolita, we tried to
escape and to create our own little pockets of freedom."
The
other Nabakov book discussed with great fervour was Invitation to
a Beheading. For the girls, this book revealed the personal nature
of totalitarianism, of just how far repressive regimes can go to
stifle imagination. The girls perceive Cincinnatus and Lolita as
heroes for being able to withstand the hold their tyrannical masters
had on them.
Though
the focus of the book is meant to be the reading club, it develops
into an exploration of how the students, Manna, Mashid, Yassi, Azin,
Mitra, Sanaz and Nassrin deal with the restrictions of their society,
how they joyfully peel off their dark robes before class, and how
reading literature leads to an examination of the world around them.
One, a divorcee with red nails (a no-no in the republic), is regularly
beaten by her third husband, for being 'used' material because she
has been married before. She cannot leave him because she has a
young daughter, and the courts routinely grant child custody to
husbands. Two of the girls are happily married. Sanaz is jilted
by the boy to whom she has been betrothed since childhood presumably
because after living in England for five years, he no longer wants
the sheltered Muslim girl his parents have selected.
Ironically,
when Sanaz goes on vacation with five girlfriends, the Revolutionary
Guard arrest and jail the six of them for 'western attitudes,' and
the girls are subjected to virginity tests. Yet another girl faces
off a series of suitors for an arranged marriage, while she is considering
immigrating to the United States to continue her studies.
Nafisi's
strong feelings about America and American culture, apparent throughout
the book, appear to have been engendered during the 1970s, when
she studied in the US. Nafisi returned to her native Iran after
an 18-year stint abroad, but left for the US once again in 1997,
to pursue a career at Johns Hopkins University's School for Advanced
International Studies. There is a sense that she grew up in an influential
and privileged family, and was therefore offered much protection.
It also explains her almost slavish admiration of all things American:
"I had just returned to my home, where I could speak at last
in my mother tongue, and here I was, longing to talk to someone
who spoke English, preferably with a New York accent, someone who
was intelligent, and appreciated Gatsby and Haagen-Dazs and knew
about Mike Gold's Lower East Side."
It must be said that defending The Great Gatsby as literature
that will set women free needs much imagination. Some of the parallels
drawn are not very convincing, "Gatsby is killed. He is killed
for a crime Daisy committed
.Tom fingered Gatsby to the bereaved
husband, who killed Gatsby as he lay floating in the pool waiting
for Daisy to call. Could my former comrades have predicted that
one day they would be tried in a revolutionary court, tortured and
killed as traitors and spies?" What connects the two acts stretches
the imagination.
All
this focus on English literature begs the question: has Nafisi read
anything at all of Persian literature? Why, despite the rich tradition
of literature, poetry and films available in the Persian language,
does Nafisi find so much meaning only in Anglo-American writing.
The only real mention of the 'other' literature is the much clichéd
A Thousand and One Nights. While Nafisi is at her best when describing
the gradual erosion of individual identity by a regime, she does
not quite make as convincing a case for Lolita as a particularly
appropriate prism through which to view the Revolution. In fact,
throughout the book, the group finds many unlikely, far-fetched,
almost forced parallels between Daisy Miller, Elizabeth Bennett,
Lolita, and themselves. The most audacious is the play on the opening
lines of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, "It is a truth
universally acknowledged that a Muslim man, regardless of his fortune,
must be in want of a nine-year-old virgin wife." If this is
not pandering to western stereotyping of Muslims then what is?
|