The Agony and the Ecstacy
Steve
bboyminn at yahoo.com
Wed Aug 8 18:23:47 UTC 2007
--- "sistermagpie" <sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> Steve:
> > People who blend those two modes, people who are
> > unable to separate them, are likely the one who were
> > most disappointed. In their minds, after 2 or 3 years
> > of constant obsession and analysis, they think they
> > know what the books should be, and are disappointed
> > when they are not.
>
> Magpie:
> LOL! Honestly, have you never read a book you didn't
> like? Did you consider it a failure on your part? Did
> you scold yourself for wanting something different?
>
> Of course not! You can dislike a book for some other
> reason than you didn't get your pet theory coming
> true. ...
bboyminn:
Of course, there are books I simply don't like. I didn't
like Lord of the Rings. I found it meandering, confusing,
dull, and slow. But there is quite a difference between
not liking a book in a broad and general context, and
picking nit with a fiery vehement vitriol.
For example, one person compared the Houses to the Nazis
and the Jews, only Gryffindors were the Nazis and
Slytherins were the Jews. [Acknowledging that I am
removing this statement from its context.] Oh really?
Nasty evil vile Gryffindors are the Nazis and poor
sweet innocent Slytherins are the Jew? Apparently, the
other Houses conspired to put upon and oppress the poor
innocent Slytherins.
It is one thing to be disappointed that Slytherins didn't
play a larger part, or that their 'some degree' of
redemption wasn't made more clear. But to go to the
extreme of paint Slytherin as poor victims, and the other
Houses as oppressors is slightly beyond the pale for me.
Slytherin, themselves, by their own behavior, created
the animosity that is felt by the other Houses. If
Slytherin want to fix that, then they have to behave in
a way that reduces the animosity. It is not up to
the other Houses to change their attitude toward
Slytherin, it is up to Slytherin to /behave in a way/
the changes the attitudes of the other Houses.
Again, that is an example of someone who is so
emotionally invested in a subplot that doesn't advance
the story that they have become slightly irrational.
Again, I readily acknowledge that I have removed the
statement from the context, so it really stands more
as an illustration than an example. This was a long
and detail discussion, so I admit there may have been
some valid context for the comparison. So, apologies
to the person who posted this idea; again, it serves
as an illustration, not as an example.
In fact, there is a thread that does exactly as you
suggest. This person simply says... 'eh... the books
simply didn't do it for me'. I don't agree with that
but they didn't like it, so they didn't like it; that's
life. Even if I can't understand it, I can easily
accept that this person simply didn't like the book.
But that is quite different from being vehemently
incensed over some minor point, or because your
favorite plot line wasn't resolved the way you
wanted. Annoyed-OK, but vehemently incensed is over
the top.
I still say that a lot of the negative criticism is
because of unfulfilled expectations, and not an
actual failing of the book itself or by the author.
Fearing a firestorm for my 'Nazi' illustration.
Steve/bboyminn
More information about the HPFGU-OTChatter
archive