Still struggling through - only just over 50% now.
Just thought I'd post some observations so far.
I find being trapped inside the head of this fixated man rather painful, not so much because of what he is, but because of his relentlessly one track mind. It's so tiring to me.
At no time have I thought that Lo asked for or was in some way responsible for what happened. In my mind, her desire to act (in any which way) isn't an issue in the society in which we find ourselves during this novel. There are some mentions of earlier society and what was acceptable then, but it clearly is not applicable at the time of our story. All the restraint was the responsibility of Humbert, not of Lo.
I also don't get any feeling that the author himself is justifying it in any way. Quite the contrary. I get the impression that he shows Humbert as a loathsome individual. He banters about holding back coffee for sex and issuing threats about Lo being institutionalised. In no way can I feel that Nabakov is communicating that this is OK.
It has been interesting to note Lo's supposed complicity and perhaps there is something slightly unusual about her, but everything is so obviously coloured by the narrative of the deranged Humbert that I don't think we can trust anything he is writing. He is a terribly unreliable narrator.
The prose itself is quite elegant, but unfortunately it is falling flat for me because of the never changing subject. I'm beginning to think that people like Humbert are not only despicable, but also utterly boring.