Volu m e I - Purdue University Calumet

them as “men of power.” Dr. Zempf creates a false persona for both Quilty and Humbert, further blurring
the line between their identities.
Quilty’s function within the realm of parody certainly has its implications in the growing
desperation and deterioration of Humbert, as seen most specifically in the second half of the film. As the
last scene recalls the film’s opening at Pavor Manor, Kubrick makes a seemingly perfect narrative circle that
proves satisfactory to many viewers in its suggested retribution on the part of Humbert. However, Corliss
points to an easily overlooked detail in the last scene in which Humbert enters the mansion with the intent
of murder, only to have his victim not present. Kubrick gives the impression that “All is as before,” Corliss
argues, “floating in our eyes with the familiarity of a reoccurring dream” (86). And of course, everything
seems to be exactly in place: objects and art strewn about the room, the chair covered in a sheet from which
we except Quilty to rise. Yet, with a more perceptive glance, it becomes apparent that the bottle that
balanced on Quilty’s concealed head in the first scene and dropped to the floor with a shatter to announce
his presence has now disappeared (Corliss 86). Further, the harpsichord that sounds as a signal of Quilty in
every scene is replaced by tragic piano music carried over from Humbert’s final departure from Lolita. In a
dramatic and eerie flourish, the music builds and cuts out, initiating Humbert’s calls to his nemesis as the
screen fades to black. As Corliss suggests, “The villain, it seems, has vanished. And Humbert has walked
into a parallel nightmare, where his righteous revenge may never be satisfied” (86). Humbert has indeed
entered a dream world, literally emerging from the haze that enveloped his travel and appearing in the
mansion’s interior rather than entering as depicted in the first scene. The surrealistic visual chaos further
lends itself to the destructive effect Quilty’s parodic presence (and lack thereof) has inflicted on Humbert,
as this scene is envisioned and reconstructed in Humbert’s disordered and deteriorating mind.
Quilty’s status as doppelganger invites him to serve as Humbert’s potential redemption in which
the murder of his double not only avenges Lolita’s disappearance, but also atones for his pedophiliac sins.
However, in one last act of parody, the elusive Quilty flees from Humbert’s grasp and entraps Humbert in
318