Sappy happy endings, Eddings, Snapefate, housism

[Tabouli]

No: HPFGUIDX 32640

Etha:
> I would have the opposite problem than this -- I might 
reject the series if it ended in a way which was to sappy/sweet/happy. A dark ending would serve 
to convey the message that even in places we want to believe could or did exist, perfection and 
complete goodness is unattainable.<

Hear hear.  Though not much chance of that, methinks, not from all available indicators (JKR's comments in interviews about the forthcoming body count, the trend throughout the four books, the current state of affairs in the Wizarding World, i.e. with a newly re-arisen Voldemort, etc.etc.)

Grey Wolf:
> The Belgariad has strong paralels to tLotR, and it is considered by 
some people to be the first truly modern fantasy story (...) The plot develops very much like the 
LotR, but (...) women exist below the neck (and are capable of joining the adventure), and the 
morality and education of the main and secondary characters agrees more with the sort of thinking
 that has been prevalecent in 80's and 90's (and 00's).<

(Tabouli risks the wrath of the ominously named Grey Wolf, not to mention John and other yet-to-be-exposed Eddings fans).  I like David Eddings well enough, and read him avidly in my teens (or at least, the Belgariad and Malloreon - I gave up when his third, supposedly independent series was a quest for yet *another* magic blue stone, for Belar's sake) but I think he has a decidedly conservative American Protestant-style moral framework.  And his East-West symbolism is pretty disturbing, if you think about it: a progression from genocide to cultural imperialism.  With his women, it bothers me a bit that 95% of his female characters have to be beautiful (whereas the attractiveness or otherwise of his male characters almost never comes up).  As for sex, well, he's making an effort, but I always get the impression that he's not really comfortable with sexually "liberated" characters... he feels much safer either marrying his characters off chastely or pushing them to the opposite end of the spectrum, like Bethra, or Belgarath the disreputable old libertine (in places), where someone (like Polgara) can disapprove of them.  I think his best effort there was with the Nadraks' culture, which he portrays quite sympathetically.

That aside, almost every dialogue which involves a mention of sex that I remember has at least one representative upholding his Americo-Christian moral framework by blushing or disapproving or getting defensive or embarrassed or all "not in front of the children" ish.  And he shies away from any direct descriptions of sex: he just discreetly implies and then draws the curtains.  Not that he should have to, mind you, but it does rather fit in with his sex is naughty message (thus spake the English-speaking world).  And what's with Ce'Nedra, who starts off pretty open and unconcerned about sex and morality in the Belgariad (happy to undress in front of Garion and trying to lead him into temptation, running races naked, etc.), with Garion being shocked and embarrassed, suddenly developing maidenly blushes about lesbian prostitution in the second series and having to be reassured... by Garion???

Ahem.  Harry Potter list.  Yes.  (though Grey Wolf is invited to submit his howls of protest and counter-argument to OT-Chatter...)  Er, to draw a hasty HP parallel, I'll reiterate a long-ago message... when hunting around for cross-cultural materials, I found an article about the French translation for HP, in which the translator mused on the difficulties of the job.  What particularly interested me was the *cultural* aspect of the matter: apparently s/he was having terrible trouble explaining to French children *why* all the characters were so embarrassed about sex and love and and emotions all the time!  Made no sense whatsoever to them: these things are a fundamental part of life: where's the embarrassment?  Ils sont bizarres, ces Anglais...

Elizabeth:
> I think Harry is destined to be alone (if he survives at all). And so is Snape, IMO. (If *he* falls 
in love, call the coffin-maker.)<

For who, Snape or his beloved?  (Though as captain of LOLLIPOPS, I should point out that my crew and I think the latter has already happened).  Actually, I can't help wondering if Snape is being groomed for an end-of-series sacrificial lamb role.  End-of-series because the relationship between him and Harry still has a long way to develop, and because all along we've been getting hints that Snape holds a lot of the keys to the mystery of Harry's past.  I'd say there must be reasonable odds on Snape and Harry finally coming to like and respect each other pages before Snape dies a dreadful yet valiant death, whispering the final key to the mystery of Harry's past/defeating Voldemort/etc. with his dying breath.  What say you, Snapefans?

Gabriel:
> And, of course, JKR clarified "off-page" for us that Hagrid was a Gryffendor. Does anyone else find it a little too convenient that everyone and their brother was in the Lion House??<

Yes, yes and absolutely.  A few months ago a lot of us came out as anti-housism protesters.  JKR implies that it's because she herself values bravery most highly of all the qualities embodied by the houses, but it starts to bother me when she crams absolutely everyone who's anyone (or at least, everyone who's anyone good) into Gryffindor. Dumbledore, the Marauders, the Trio, Hagrid, Lily, McGonagall... I mean, come on!  It's worse than Enid Blyton and North Tower in Malory Towers!  (and we all know what genre *that* series falls into, chuckle chuckle...)

Tabouli.


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