This lack of reliability, therefore, in what the perpetrator of these crimes writes, means that there are internal discrepancies only emphasised by the focus in narrative on interesting word choices, the assertion of Humbert’s character over the implied reader and other aesthetics of the novel which are external to what the reader may consider the plot to be. In contrast with Nabokov’s first foray into the plot of an older man attracted to a much younger girl, Lolita cannot be separated from the experiences of this man: he tries to abscond himself brazenly through his own memoir. Does this result in a lack of thrust in plot? To some extent, yes: the narrator is untrustworthy; even the setting is eroticised. However, this adds to the impact of the transgression which occurs and strengthens the plot to the extent that only this epitomisation of postmodernist writing can do: the fact that the ruination of a young girl is aestheticised so much is gruesome and lends further insight to the mind of the protagonist.

Introduction
The narrative voice in Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita must be approached in two ways. First, as the narrative voice of Humbert Humbert, as he tells the story of his trysts with the young Dolores Haze. Secondly, the authorial voice of Nabokov himself, who inserts himself into the narrative and weaves aspects of his life into parts of the description such as the linguistics. The problem of distinction between the two has been attempted to be reconciled by splitting analysis of the text into that of both Nabokov and his protagonist, as they are treated as separate from each other in terms of narrative, in the hopes of achieving greater clarity. This is to be further fleshed out in discussing the postmodern plot and why uniquely this problem arises in analysing such texts: often narrators within the genre lack the om