I recently read Lolita and was really conflicted as to whether I liked it or not. In one sense it was an uncomfortable read but I found I couldn’t put it down. I see a lot of people saying that they hate it because Humbert is such a monster but surely that’s the point? Nabokov makes it such an uncomfortable read through putting it in first person; we are meant to slightly sympathise with Humbert (because of his unreliable narration) and then feel disgusted with ourselves. Combined with the ‘American Dream’/Academia/Psychological Thriller aesthetic it’s almost as much a mockery of society and its romanticisation of crime as The Secret History. This is even proven by Lolita’s resurgence in popular aesthetics and romanticisation.
It sounds like you got the point of the book and found it to be a compelling read that gave you things to think about, which is what you’re supposed to get out of a book like that. If Nabokov was trying to write a book where the protagonist wasn’t a monster, where we were supposed to uncomplicatedly like and be charmed by the writer, that isn’t the book he would have written. Instead, you met the book on its own terms and got something out of it.