Lolita - Vladimir Nabokov

I loved this novel.  It contains such beautiful language and although it is not pornographic, it evokes much emotion and imagery - at least for me.  I think Ellie said it well, it is haunting.  Yet fascinating at the same time.  The abuse of power, the deceit, the sexual acts were horrible.  I feel absolutely no sympathy for Humbert Humbert.  Just because he feels some remorse does not make me sympathize for him at all.  In no way is he a victim.  Sure, Lo was no 'angel' and yes, she managed to manipulate Humbert Humbert in her own ways too does not excuse what he did nor lessen his crimes.  To do this is to blame the victim.  Remember comments like, "What was she doing wearing such a short skirt and low cut top anyway?  What did she except" directed at sexual assault victims?  I am not falling for this trap.  Humbert Humbert knows better.  He is the adult, and an educated one to boot.  What does consent mean?  I am not saying that a young person has no agency to consent but to threaten a child (or adult) with a horrible life of state institution or "you're not getting your morning coffee until you have performed your morning duty" is not what I consider to be acts of love or even bribery.  This is an outright threat.

Humbert Humbert is on the outside polite but yet is a different person inside as revealed through his relationship with Lo and his obsession with nymphets.  To be obsess with a cerain body type, to not care about a person's mind at all is baffling - is there something 'missing' in Humbert Humbert?  Is he missing what we call 'conscience'?  And if so, do we hold him legally accountable?  I ask this because someone who is mentally ill/disabled can be legally held non-accountable for the crimes that they commit.  They may be committed to mental institutions indefinitely but they cannot be guilty in the legal system.  How then do we deal with those without a conscience?  What is society's duty to such persons and especially to his/her victims?

What if the roles were reverse and it was a middle aged woman and a twelve year old boy?  How the crime seem 'lesser'?  Is there gender dynamics at play here given that in any heterosexual encounter, the woman is usually in the submissive role, biologically speaking?

I would not invoke cultural relativism in the case of Humbert Humbert and Dolores.  This is a clearcut case to me of manipulative and abuse by Humbert, regardless of Lo's actions and behaviour.  He is a predator and his only redeeming feature to me is that he is not a thief.  He rightfully hands over money derived from Lo's mother's property in the end.