Gender - RH & SS tasks - Course subjects - Draco's looks

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 15080

Parker wrote:

>I can't write by formula.  The characters tend to spring, full-blown,
>into my subconscious, where they scream at me to let them out by
>writing about them.

>IIRC, JKR has said in chats that Harry came to her much the same
>way.  I don't think she would then say, OK, I need so many women, so
>many men, etc.

I wouldn't suggest that she, or any other author, should.  When a 
character walks into your head--what a miracle!--by all means, ask him 
what he's like, don't tell him.  Definitely don't try to turn him into 
a girl.

But the mysterious workings of the subconscious mind have a lot to do 
with the assumptions we have absorbed and accepted.  If a writer's 
female characters were all fainting ninnies and his/her male 
characters were all macho he-men, I'd gently question whether his/her 
subconscious needed a little consciousness-raising!  In fact, I would 
suggest that such a writer =would= be "writing by formula": the 
formulas that had been taught to her/him through generations of 
extremely rigid gender roles in society and fiction.  Thank heaven, 
that has changed, not because writers decided to adopt a different 
formula (though a few took this awkward approach), but because enough 
people began to see women and men as full, complex beings who don't 
have to fit the roles a sexist society intends for them, and began to 
write out of that new consciousness.  That writing in turn has given 
us all models for being in the world that don't heed those stupidly 
(and tragically) restrictive rules.

Amanda wrote:

>Why is being viewed as a leader so important? Why are you only 
important
>as a woman if you can be viewed favorably through a traditionally
>male-role lens? Why try to be female men, instead of very strong 
women
>doing what they want to do (which may be raising kids or being a 
school
>nurse)?

Being a leader is being a female man?  Ouch.  I don't think leadership 
is a good thing because it's a male role and male roles are better; I 
think it has value in itself.  And as a valuable role, it should not 
be limited, whether in life or fiction, mostly to people of one sex, 
any more than the role of nurturing others should be available only to 
women.  What a nightmare that world would be... (and is, since in many 
cultures, it's going strong).

I don't hear anyone here saying that women =have= to be leaders in 
order to be viewed favorably.  It would be nice to have it as an 
option, is all.  Too much fiction has instructed girls that their 
options are to nurture and support others, and that the women who take 
leadership are not "real women" (i.e. they are portrayed as bitchy, 
shrewish, asexual, lesbian [read: deviant, in these books], unlovable, 
or just plain unpleasant.  I'm not accusing JKR of writing such a 
work--not at all!--but I would still like to see more variety and 
untraditional roles among the female characters in HP.

It was only a generation or two ago that US women had three 
thoroughly-approved career options--nurse, secretary, or teacher--and 
none of them was supposed to interfere with being a mother.  Many 
women did do other things, bless them, but they had to be willing to 
swim against the current.  Perhaps feminism has been so successful 
that we've forgotten how limited our options were just a short time 
ago.

Amanda:

>I think it might simply be that when the medical director at a school 
is
>female, she'll tend to be called "school nurse." Pomfrey does
>significantly more than your average school nurse.

So a woman who does the work of a doctor, has the training of a 
doctor, etc. is called a nurse, whereas a man doing the same exact job 
would be called a doctor?  Sad, but possibly true.

Shannon wrote:

>But we also know that Professor
>Dumbledore asked Hagrid and Madame Maxime to undertake a job over the 
summer
>too.  Do you think this mission may have something to do with what 
Professor
>Dumbledore said to Cornelius Fudge about sending envoys to the 
giants?  Do
>you think that Hagrid's task and Snape's task will be revealed as we 
get to
>the fifth book?

(1) Yes (2) I hope so, but maybe it will take more than one book to 
get there (JKR likes to plant ideas early and let them sit there a 
good long time;  e.g., she hasn't delivered on the suggestion that 
Peter will be swayed by his debt to Harry, and may not until book 7).

Vlatka wrote:
> Also, I wonder if anyone has tried to figure out the number and 
names
> of classes offered at Hogwarts. 

When they're choosing their new classes (this must be in CoS) they are 
looking through long lists of course descriptions.  Maybe most of them 
don't end up happening, or have to be tutorials, because not enough 
students sign up, but there seems to be quite a selection beyond what 
we see the Trio taking.

MC wrote:

>In fact, the only time Malfoy's looks
>are ever mentioned, it's at the Yule Ball, and Harry thinks his robes
>make him look like a vicar. No comment.

Hey!  I resemble that remark!

Rev. Amy Z
who hopes she looks ravishing in her robes ;-)

---------------------------------------------------------
 "=Wow!=" said Dennis, as though nobody in their wildest 
 dreams could hope for more than being thrown into a 
 storm-tossed, fathoms-deep lake and pushed out of it 
 again by a giant sea-monster.
                           -HP and the Goblet of Fire
---------------------------------------------------------