Literary Hub has an article up: “The 50 Best One-Star Reviews of Lolita.” The first time I tried to read Lolita, I did not get past in the first pages. I went to Amazon and read all 147 reviews, which gives you an idea of how long ago that was. I found they fell into three general camps: people who objected to the immorality of the story, people who loved the writing, and pedophiles. Reviews were not reviewed as they are now. Men wrote how much the novel reassured them that they were not alone in their sexual relationships with children. “Man-Child Love” advocates and rapists rationalized their behavior through literature. You can see it in responses to the one-star reviews.*

That name Hummer Humbert gave Delores, a 12-year-old raped child, has found it’s way into general usage as the name, Lolita, for sexually aggressive young women is perhaps ironic. It is also a horrible abuse of power.

Some argue that Nabokov wanted to see just how detestable he could make a character and still find readers, but ultimately, there are many things we can do but should not do. There is such a thing as judgement.

Here are a few of the reviews and comments on Amazon:

*Have a look at Edward S. just above. As a reader are you supposed to support HH’s obsession, or see past it as monstrous? I would like to think Nabakov was toying with his readers in much the same way that HH does with a child. It would be something if readers picked up on that, if they recognized how convincing evil can be. Well, friends, there are plenty of readers who fail to see beyond HH’s tale to feel shock that they have even temporarily sided with him.

Pedophiles inevitably find confirmation. They do not find HH monstrous, they find a kindred spirit. They can easily explain HH’s behavior. They are, after all, on his side.