[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Maturity of kids in the Potterverse (moved from main list)

[Laura Ingalls Huntley]

Ali said:
>I do mean in a sexual way, but also - and please note this is my 
>perception - they act like "adults" at a younger age. 

Again, I think this is because of the fact that they aren't real teens, but tv teens made for the purpose of being appealing by adult writers.  I remember when Dawson's Creek came out, everyone was talking about how "adult" the characters acted compared to real teens.  Never watched the show, but from what I've seen of similar programs (i.e. geared to similar audiences..I do confess that I am a Buffy fan) that's pretty much the norm.

Ali continues:
>I had agreed with Darrin that JKR's WW and her portrayal of 
>adolescence does seem a little "quaint", but that the 
>comparison with US 5th graders - or the US in general might 
>not be appropriate as the UK is different. 

And I still say it's not "quaint"...because in the "olden times" children *still* did not lack feelings that Harry does..

She *is* choosing to ignore certain aspects of sexuality..or delay their appearance, yes.  But to call that being "quaint" seem wrong to me.

Ali:
>Perhaps (this is a *suggestion* rather than an opinion)- and could 
>also be flamed - that American TV likes to show things how it should 
>be, and British TV likes to show things how "it is" (or how the 
>writers think it is). 

Hmmm..I don't think American TV shows things as is "should be", per se.  More like..they show what the audience wants -- which are things that they can't have in their own lives for various and sundry reasons.  Things that probably aren't *good* for them..but are exciting, etc.  Stuff like that.

Ali:
>I don't know that the timescale for children experiencing their first 
>sexual pangs has changed greatly over time. If you think about it, 
>Romeo and Juliet were about 13 years old weren't they? What I do 
>think has changed over time -and between cultures - is when it is 
>acceptable to discuss it (and presumably to acknowledge it to 
>oneself) and act on it. 

I'm with you up until here.  Um, sort of.  I think it's always (at least in the last century or so) been discussed at an early age amongst the kids -- it's just that the kids didn't talk to adults about it and the adults didn't talk to each other.  And remember...in PoA, when he first "notices" girls (which seems like a ridiculously late age to be noticing, IMO), he isn't acting OR talking.  In fact, he wouldn't have acted in GoF at all if the Yule Ball hadn't forced the issue upon him.  I think the times at which Harry start to *act* on his feelings is okay...maybe a little idealistic, but a *good* age...it's the fact that he has just started to have these feelings the previous year that I find unrealistic.  

And of course, I think JKR has so far skirted the issue of puberty entirely at this point -- who knows if it's actually happening -- but she's not talking about it.

>I personally have no problem with Harry 
>coming to grips with his sexuality at the age of 13+. Harry 
>afterall has had many other things to confront before this 
>point.

Again, it's not that he's late in *acting*...it's that he's late in feeling...

Also..I don't think the "he's had other things on his mind" argument holds much water at all.  There is always room for sex.  Always.

^_~ No, I'm serious.  And when his feelings for Cho come out, his life is just as danger-ridden as ever, and he *still* has time to fantasize about her -- to the point of distraction.  Esp. at that age, attraction to the opposite sex (or, heck, the same sex) isn't something that takes effort or time, IMO -- in fact, it's something that you really can't avoid, whether you want to or not.  I mean, think about.  The whole world could be coming to an end and do you think that would change Harry's feelings about Cho or his preoccupancy with them?  I don't think so.

laura


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]