Ron's Jealousy of Harry; Neuroses of Ron & Hermione (Long)

[Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer]

No: HPFGUIDX 16821

Hi --

Yes .... I'm *still* pregnant.  <g>  She's clearly going to be late ...

Demelza wrote:

> Well, we agree that that there is no evidence to support Hermione's
> assertion that Ron is jealous of Harry's fame and attention he
> garner. Therefore, Hermione's assessment was incorrect.

Nope.  Amy Z pointed out the fallacy of your logic.  You've skipped some
steps logic-wise in reaching your conclusion.  Amy also pointed out that
one must assume that Hermione is not to be trusted or have solid
evidence that Ron *isn't* jealous in order to reach your conclusion.
The idea that Ron is jealous of Harry's fame is not jarring to most
readers it would seem.  I, of course, being a huge Hermione fan do agree
with Amy that Hermione is in general a good judge of people and is very
perceptive.  So, like Amy, if Hermione says Ron is jealous, then I tend
to believe her.  As I've argued before, Harry also believes her.

Amy Z also said:

> There is supportive evidence after the fact.  "In tribute to their
> recently repaired friendship, Ron kept the bitterness in his voice to
> a minimum" (GoF, may be inaccurate quote; it's from memory).  That
> implies that he has had bitterness in his voice before, even though it
> was never commented on.
>
Good point Amy.  I also like the other evidence that you were able to
cite.  Demelza has in the past discounted evidence that occurs *after* a
scene in question.  In anticipation of that argument, I will comment
that authors don't always map out *everything* in great detail and
proceed straight through from chapter 1 to chapter 37 without ever
moving forwards or backwards.  I really don't think JKR has details such
as you suggest mapped out that explicitly.  I think she has an outline
and she knows in general where she's going.  I think she has a good
handle on each character.  She has alot of extraneous material about the
wizarding world, and she's revealing it bit by bit.  But, she's said,
for example, that there will be loads of details that never make it into
the books because there simply isn't space to cover it.  I don't think
she evaluates each scene and thinks back to herself, "Is this all
supported by things I've written in previous books or chapters?"  It's a
creative, evolving process.  The editing process can also affect
things.  JKR might well have inserted other clues about Ron's jealousy
that were prior to the scene in question, but they might have been small
details that didn't survive the editing process.  She also might not
have noticed that they *didn't* survive the editing process.

Point is: I still believe that Demelza's analysis is entirely too
scientific to be applied to literature.  I think you're trying to
interject too much *objectivity* to what is inherently a very
*subjective* subject, Demelza.  I'd be interested to know if other
former or current English lit majors agree with me.  I'm a lawyer, and
so I'm familiar with logical analysis.  But, the rigid application of
not only logic but scientific principles to literary analysis .... well,
I don't really see that it applies all that well.  But then, maybe it's
just that I don't agree with the logical conclusions that Demelza has
reached.  I see no reason to doubt Hermione's assessment of Ron's
jealousy, and I don't require that JKR have provided me with specific
unambiguous examples of it *prior* to the GoF fight scene.  She's given
me enough other groundwork as Amy calls it to make it believable.

> We know from Ron's mirror of Erised experience, that his
> heart's desire (as of PS/SS) was to be Quidditch Team Captain and to
> be Head Boy---like _Charlie and Bill_. It's not really fair to Ron for
>
> us to interpret his desires to be like his _brothers_, as 'jealousy of
>
> _Harry_"

Dumbledore didn't interpret Ron's Mirror of Erised desires in that way
and neither did I.  He says, "Your friend Ron, who has always been
overshadowed by his brothers, sees himself standing alone, the best of
them all" (loose paraphrase probably).  He doesn't want to be *like* his
brothers; he wants to be *better than* his brothers.  He wants to be
Head Boy like Bill AND Quidditch Captain like Charlie.  He doesn't want
to just excel at the same level that they did -- he wants to be
*everything* and significantly, all alone: the center of attention.  Who
do we know in the books who often is just that: the center of
attention?  Harry!  I don't fault Ron for being jealous -- he's got alot
to contend with.  He obviously already had some self-esteem problems
with trying to live up to his brothers before he ever even met Harry.
Having his best friend turn out to be the most famous wizard in the
world can't help but affect Ron's already fragile ego IMO.

> Because I'm not a shipper of any kind, I would have to disagree. I
> don't think Hermione spends much time with anyone outside of Harry
> and Ron.

Shipper or no, you're making a fairly broad assumption there.  It's
unsupported by evidence.  You've argued that we have no evidence that
Ron feels jealousy about Harry's fame prior to the fight scene.  To use
your same logical analysis, I would want some evidence for your
assertion that Hermione doesn't spend time with anyone outside of Harry
and Ron.  When she's "off-screen," we can't know where she is or what
she's doing.  Evidence that Harry & Ron observe her studying alone on
various occasions when they are estranged from her in the PoA fight is
not solid evidence that she unequivocally doesn't have any other friends
or other activities to occupy her time.

> Likewise, you can't possibly argue that Hermione is truthfully
> reporting to Harry her impression at the feast. We aren't privy to
> her thought process. In order to objectively determine her veracity,
> you must examine all of Hermione's past behaviors, especially those
> concerning Ron. In cluding, Hermione's giggling at Ron's revelation
> of arachnophobia. Her insensitivity towards Ron's concerns that his
> pet rat is being targeted by her pet cat. Ron's ability at chess.
> PS/SS specifically states that Hermione wasn't good at it, nearly the
> same way she wasn't good at Divination.

Um .... what do Ron's chess-playing skills (and Hermione's lack thereof)
have to do with Hermione's veracity?  Puzzled .... (equally puzzled by
the reference that she isn't good at Divination).  :::shakes head:::
Sorry but I have *no* idea how either of these facts have any bearing on
whether Hermione is in general a truthful character or a pathological
liar.

> Furthermore, does Hermione have an 'axe to grind with Ron'? You bet
> she does! Less than a year before, Harry took Ron's side during their
> estrangement. In light of this pattern, she does have a motive.

A motive to do what?  Like Amy, I don't see that telling Harry that Ron
is jealous of his fame accomplishes anything in particular for
Hermione.  Unless you're arguing that she *wanted* to be sure Harry
wouldn't try to make up with Ron, that he would prolong the fight they'd
had.  Even this staunch H/H'er won't buy that.  There's evidence that
she went back & forth between the two of them at least occasionally (as
the R/H'ers have pointed out on numerous occasions).

> My point is Hermione's personality isn't all that 'black & white'.

I don't think her personality is "black & white."  But, I still don't
see why you think she'd lie about Ron being jealous of Harry's fame.
What exactly would her objective have been?

> Again, if this excessive devotion to work and productivity interferes
> with her daily functioning, as the diagnostic criteria states, then
> it is will be more definitive. But as I wrote above, you cannot
> discount the presence of the behavior.

Actually, yes I do discount the presence of the behavior.  I have yet to
see evidence that her preoccupation with details, rules, organization,
etc. reaches a level that the "major point of the activity is lost."
She uses study schedules & organization, but the major point of the
activity is not lost.  It is achieved and with great success.
Similarly, I don't see evidence that she is devoted to studying to the
exclusion of leisure and friendships.  There was a period in PoA when
she might have thrown herself into studying as an escape (although we
don't know for sure that she didn't have any other friendships or
leisure activities during this time), but in general, her friendship
with Ron & Harry comes first.

> Well, if that's the favored argument, then it
> can be applied to virtually everything written by J. K. Rowling in the
>
> Potter series; that most of it is distorted because it's written from
> Harry's POV. I'm glad I don't write fiction. It must be terribly
> unsatisfying to learn your reading audience has so little regard for
> the way _you_ have choosen to represent _your_ characters.

I doubt JKR would take offense that readers bring different
interpretations to bear on her writing.  That's the point.  That's the
beauty of literary analysis.  I see things that you don't see, and the
converse holds true.  It's *not* scientific.  There is no *single* right
answer at the end of the day.  Harry's POV is a limiting factor ....
there are things that we can't know because JKR didn't take us inside
the heads of Hermione or Ron or Hagrid.  So, we can speculate.  But,
there is no objective right answer at the end of the day.  JKR wouldn't
read all of this and award the blue ribbon to any of our debates.

> First of all, these aren't _my_ definitions.

I know that, Demelza.  I just didn't phrase it correctly.  I should have
said, Hermione doesn't meet 4 of the 8 diagnostic criteria that you set
out in your message.  She doesn't meet *any* of them IMO.

> Again, as I wrote in my prior messages and have repeated here, once
> these
> criteria are met. That is, once these behaviors interfere with her
> daily functioning, she will have the 4 or more criteria for OCD as set
>
> by the American Psychiatric Association. Once again, I will repeat.
> That just because she cannot be diagnosed at this time, that does not
> erase the existence of the behaviors nor does it erase any mental
> health concern for them.

Except that I disagree that the behaviors are even present.  But,
whatever.  Sounds like we at least agree that Hermione doesn't have OCD
at this time.

> A third party might successfully argue I'm as determined to give
> Hermione a psychiatric diagnosis as you are in denial that she has
> the potential for one.

As you yourself have said, we all have the *potential* for one.  I just
don't believe that her behavior meets the diagnostic criteria that you
set out in your earlier message.  I don't agree with you that it's just
a matter of waiting until these behavioral traits manifest themselves to
a degree that they interfere with her "daily functioning."  I don't
think she arguably has a solid enough foundation for OCD at this point.
Maybe her preoccupation with rules & organization could escalate to a
degree that it interfered with the end objective: achieving high marks &
academic success.  In that case, she would have Behavior #1 on the APA
list.  Maybe she would eventually study to the exclusion of spending
time with Harry and/or Ron (or anyone else).  If a future books says,
"Hermione was now spending all her time studying.  She refused to have
anything to do with him or Ron.  Harry knew she wasn't spending any time
with the girls in her dormitory because Parvarti confirmed this.  etc."
-- then you would have some evidence of Behavior #3.  But, as of right
now, the evidence for Behaviors 1 & 3 is *not* there.  And, SPEW is a
weak link for Behavior #4.  "Rigidity & stubbornness" -- seems like you
need more than just that one trait (which can apply to alot of different
people who do not have OCD) to make a valid argument for OCD.

> And I might add that this fictitious third party probably won't ignore
> my constant use of the words 'potential', 'possible', 'probably' and
> won't ignore the times I've written that the behaviors must interfere
> with Hermione's activites of daily living(functioning) in order to be
> diagnosed with OCD.

As stated above, my point is that evidence for the underlying behaviors
is not there.  So, it's not just a matter of waiting for these behavior
patterns to escalate to the point that they interfere with daily
functioning.  The behaviors themselves have yet to manifest themselves.
IMO.

> Likewise I don't see Ron self-destructing either. What has puzzled me
> from reading the various critiques on Ron is that one set of desires
> is regarded as 'positive' (Hermione's desire for academic
> achievement) and another set is regarded as 'negative' (Ron's desire
> for financial stability and recognition).

I don't think the goals themselves are positive versus negative.  I just
put a positive spin on Hermione's methods for reaching her goals.  She
wants academic success, and she takes the steps to achieve it.  My
problem with Ron is not at all that his goals are inherently negative.
I just have the impression that he does little but moan about it.  I do
see your point & Amy's point that he can't do too much to achieve
financial success given his age, but maybe it's the "academic success is
the path to other success" mindset that I admittedly have.  I can't help
thinking "Get good grades; ensure your future."  That's just me
projecting my own bias on him though.  He could be financially
successful without ever cracking a book & I do know that.  In the end,
it's probably just that I identify with Hermione.  And, I don't identify
at all with Ron.

I also do think his ambitions & insecurities put him more at risk for
being targeted by the dark side than Hermione's ambitions.  I just don't
see the whole "plant a super-student at Hogwarts to challenge Hermione's
status as star pupil" as an effective means of targeting someone close
to Harry.  Sure, it's possible.  But, Ron's ambitions & vulnerabilities
are, IMHO, more likely to be targeted.

Penny


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