Lockhart - Yuck! -- sexism/banality of evil [take two]

[Indigo]

No: HPFGUIDX 19770

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Schlobin at a... wrote:

I'm not sure why my reply went through with just the quotes and not 
my responses, so here I try again! 

> I think it's interesting that folks are critical of Hermione and 
> Molly Weasley for their crush on Lockhart. 

We don't hear of anyone else's crushes on Lockhart really. And both 
of these women are portrayed as having good heads on their shoulders, 
and not prone to girlish flights of swooning, bodice-heaving 
fantasy.  

Hermione even goes so far as to not get what the big deal is about 
Krum in Book 4, though he chooses her for his girlfriend.  So other 
than the one thing with Lockhart, she's proven to be more sensible 
than to get all swoony.

And I'm pretty sure Krum got girls following him all over; even 
Gilderoy wasn't quite able to manage that to that level.

> 
> Molly has never even met the man, but is beguiled by his good 
> looks...of course so is the newspaper that voted him the smile of 
the  week/year, whatever, 

Yes, but who else has won that award, or did Gilderoy whip it up that 
year so he could win it?

and Albus Dumbledore (who hired him), 

who else was in contention for the job that year? No one, as I 
recall -- Dumbledore had to make use of what was available, such that 
it was. 

and his 
> publisher (who printed him)

Publishers aren't necessarily scrupulous people. That may not be the 
nicest thing to say but it's true. If Lockhart's books made 
interesting enough reading to turn a profit, the publisher might not 
have looked too closely into how Lockhart came by all these 
experiences.

.....So I don't think we can blame Molly.

I think it's that no females are given detailed attention in the 
books except those who have to relate to Harry on some level, so 
Molly and Hermione as friends and closest to Harry were the only 
overt reactions to Gilderoy that we got to see close-up.

Maybe other girls got all swoony for him too.
> 
> I think it's interesting that literature tends to blame women for 
> being manipulative in attracting men,
> and blame women for being attracted to good looking worthless men 
(I  tend to wonder how much of Gilderoy Lockhart was based on JKR's 
ex  husband -- after all, she identifies with Hermione)....
> 
> But rarely are men blamed for being attracted to good looking 
> worthless women (Veela)...it's the women who tend to be labeled...

What evidence do we have that the Veela are worthless?

Fleur was good enough [and only part veela] to be picked as a 
Champion for the Triwizard Tournament.

As for the other veela? We haven't seen anything of them except that 
they give off the supernatural pheremone that urges men to do stupid 
things to impress them.  

 
> anyway, Lockhart was evil. He isn't as smart as Voldemort, or as 
> effective. But he was willing to abandon Ginny to V 

I don't think he so much was willing to abandon Ginny to Voldemort 
[because we didn't at that point *know* Riddle = Voldemort]  as it 
was that Lockhart believed it was already too late for Ginny, and 
that whatever had killed her at the heir's bidding would likely kill 
him, Harry, and Ron as well. 

and to kill Ron and Harry for his own reputation.... that is evil. 

Actually, he never said anything about killing them. Just [to borrow 
a term from another fandom] mindwiping them. 

He had no 
> compunction and no guilt. And what about all the other 
> wizards/witches from whom he stole memory and reputation?

He did steal from them, but he didn't go so far as to kill them.  
Keeping in mind the evidence we've seen that he's not as competent a 
wizard as he says he is -- which could mean that perhaps Gilderoy 
*does* feel guilty, because his memory charms stand a better than 
even chance of wearing off, and having the rightful monster-slayers 
turn up and take him to task for the quack charlatan fake loser he 
really is. 

People are very good at fooling themselves and rationalizing things. 

I think that Gilderoy *could* have killed in many occasions to 
further his ambition but that he *didn't* and *doesn't*  is telling.

I think that he's a feckless, self-centered, incompetent, cowardly 
git [to use Ron's terminology] who thinks only of himself, and 
impulsively acts without considering the consequences of his actions.

If he left a trail of bodies behind him, that would be another 
story.  



Indigo