Pink ribbon bows, diet Coke, Lana del Rey, pastels, red lipstick, and heart-shaped glasses. My first introduction to Lolita was when I was young, younger than Dolores Hayes (Lolita) herself; through a romanticized video edit, I happened to see scrolling on Instagram. While there is something to be said of young, impressionable minds spending time on the internet, specifically social media, my focus is less on preventing social media use but instead encouraging critical evaluation of the things we are and have been exposed to. To continue my story, I noticed the full movie was available on YouTube. Captivated by the cinematography and fashion of the film, in addition to complete naivety as to the movie’s content, I watched it with my friend. To say we were horrified and deeply disturbed would be beyond an understatement. Not only at seeing a girl meant to be our age be victimized by a man as old as our fathers but also the reaction and romanticization of the film we discovered after searching online for anything to help us make sense of the horror film we just watched. The sexualization of women’s bodies was nothing new to us, but this movie and how people interpreted it muddled the difference between women embracing the hyperfeminine and women being victimized. For more information on the voices of women who partake in coquette culture.
The novel ITSELF
To understand the Lolita subculture and its counterparts, it is crucial to understand the source material. There is another Her Campus article that offer excellent and insightful criticism on Lolita; however, for the purpose of this article, my summary will be short. Vladimir Nabokov’s 1958 novel Lolita is written from the point of view of Humbert Humbert. It follows the predatory relationship between the adult Humbert and Dolores, a twelve-year-old girl to whom he assigns the nickname Lolita. This abuse is romanticized in his point of view and takes place when she is under his care as her legal guardian. While there is an abundance of discourse over the book itself, it is clear that Nabokov’s writing exemplifies Humbert’s perversion and his role as an unreliable narrator. The intention of Lolita is not to be appropriated as an erotica or romance but instead, “It is an incisive examination of a pedophile’s downfall and the people he takes along with him.” as mentioned in the essay Ugly Beautiful written by Roxane Gay.
The film Adaptations
The film adaptations of the book which are – in the most straightforward terms – highly controversial. One thing that makes them so unsavory is that Nabokov requested that no depictions of women or girls be used on the cover when publishing the Novel. Through this request, Nabokov stresses the importance of not using the bodies of young girls as vehicles to tell this twisted story. This is a strong argument against why adapting this story onto the screen was inappropriate, given the nature of the Novel and the author’s wishes, yet it was still created. The first movie was Stanley Kubrick’s in 1962, which was unfaithful to the original book due to censorship laws. The second was Adrian Lyne’s 1980 adaptation, which was more accurate due to leeway with what was permitted to be shown on screen. These movies depicted flirtatious and sexualized young girls and created a new category. Lolita became “a pubescent girl who is sexually precocious or who is regarded in sexual terms by an older person.” As defined by the Oxford Dictionary, characters who fit into this category began to show up more often in film and became this idealized girl figure who the concept of could be appealing to young and impressionable girls who also want to feel and be perceived as attractive.
The MEDIA’S role in defining lolita and Couqette
One main component of the interpretations of Lolita turning into the coquette and nymphet subculture was Tumbler. Tumbler offered an outlet for people to share their interests and find themselves. However, the issue with Tumbler was a lack of moderation, especially with sensitive subject matter and inappropriate posts. With nearly complete freedom over what was allowed to be posted on this online outlet, it was not uncommon for posts to showcase unhealthy and possibly damaging material. For example, Tumbler was filled with “thinspo” and other eating disorder content, as well as pedophilic posts and sexually explicit photos and videos. These themes, mixed with the media interpretation of the Lolita movie (specifically the 1980 adaptation), would be the basis for which Nymphet and Coquette were born.
Today, Coquette is characterized by youthful and feminine aesthetics. Distinctive of this subculture are light colors, bows, and Lana del Rey. Lana Del Rey’s prominence in this subculture is due to her leaning into Coquette through her album cover song lyrics and, most notably, her song Lolita. Her status as a celebrity and an artist who makes genuinely enjoyable music could persuade her audience intentionally or not to be desensitized to these themes and not question when they see destructive behavior on the internet.
Trends are trendy for a reason. No guilt should be associated with enjoying bows, popular music, and other things associated with femininity. However, engaging in trends in a way that is conscious of where they come from and how partaking will affect you is crucial. It is easy to get caught up in what we believe is prevalent. That being said, educating oneself on what you identify with can help foster growth and a productive relationship with social media, which is a realistic way to take care of yourself while existing on the internet.Â