I think that author missed the point of Lolita...

...and given all the gross misinterpretations that you pointed out, it's likely he didn't even read it. And why on earth would the book's "fan base" be people who identify with or want to emulate the main character? It's ridiculous to assume that readers would want to emulate Humbert at all (as you pointed out), and even more ridiculous to suggest that's why people like the book. I liked it because in terms of language and craftsmanship, it is an absolute masterpiece. If the average sentence in the English language is a cracker, then Nabokov's sentences are truffles or caviar. And on a whole, the work expresses a picture of a character that is complex, beautiful, disgusting, intriguing... perhaps a picture of the ultimate solipsist. Nabokov himself said it's silly when critics go scouring a literary work trying to find some deeper social message. He said his works should just be appreciated as art. I concur with that. The fact that the term "Lolita" has acquired other connotations and significance in society today is just an unintentional byproduct. Most people browsing "lolicon" on the web or elsewhere are not familiar with the book and aren't making any connections. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good analysis as usual, though, Diss. Do you write for any sites like Cracked? Your suggestion that they could have "made fun of the hysteria itself rather than mindlessly joining in on it" is a good one, and I would love to see some kind of humorous parody that accomplishes that.