The Female Students (and other female charcters)

[cindysphynx]

No: HPFGUIDX 33210

Judy wrote:

>I love the Potter books, 
> but the lack of good female characters is a *major* disapointment 
to 
> me.  

<snip>
 
> The treatment of women in the Potterverse smacks of tokenism.  
Sure, 
> they can be on the faculty, but they prune flowers (Sprout) or fix 
> sniffles (Pomfrey, who is called a nurse and not a doctor) or 
> fuss about smudges on library books (Madam Pince) while the 
> males save the universe.  

Hmmm.  While I would welcome more and better female characters, I 
think we do have to acknowledge JKR's limited successes in 
incorporating women into the books so far.  The list of successes is 
a short list, but it is a list nonetheless:

1.  Rita Skeeter.  She is a brilliant characterization IMHO, as JKR 
really has her ooze insincerity.  She is very important, and she is 
an example of a character who could easily have been male but is 
female.

2.  Mrs. Lestrange.  Again, it appears that Mrs. Lestrange rather 
than Mr. Lestrange wears the pants in the family.  It could have 
easily gone the other way.

3.  Madam Maxime.  Again, she is a character who could have been a 
man.  She will probably be important in future books.

4.  Winky.  She could have easily been a male.

5.  Trelawney.  Like her or not, believe in her or not, you have to 
admit that she gets plenty of attention in two books and is 
reasonably well-developed.

I also think we have to be careful about denigrating what the female 
teachers do.  If we complain that Sprout "prunes flowers," we have to 
make the same complaint that Snape "just cooks."  Also, I don't 
recall anyone having sniffles fixed by Madam Pomfrey.  Instead, I 
recall her re-growing bones that a male teacher had accidently 
removed, in addition to fixing all manner of signficant injuries.

On balance, I think the books are definitely improving in their 
attempt to work in meaningful female characters. Most of the better 
female characters are in GoF, IMHO.  There is still a ways to go, but 
we do have four major female characters (Rita, Hermione, McGonagall 
and Trelawney) who get a fair amount of attention and development 
from JKR, and we are almost certain to see more. 


>And, all the female teachers seem to fit the 
> "fussy, uptight" stereotype, as does Hermione. 

I think it overstates the case a bit to say that "all" of the female 
teachers fit the fussy, uptight stereootype.  I don't see Trelawney 
as fussy and uptight.  I also don't see Hooch or McGonagall as fussy 
or uptight -- McGonagall is strict (as she should be), but she bent 
the rules to get Harry a broomstick in PS/SS.  If McGonagall's 
strictness makes her uptight, then I'd say Snape is equally uptight 
because he is especially strict with Harry.

As I've said, I'd like to see JKR do more with the female characters, 
and there is room for improvement.  It's awfully hard to argue that 
women have been given a whole heck of a lot to do.  And when they 
have been given a bit of limelight, they are sometimes wooden or 
obnoxious.  (Ginny, Fleur).  But things could have been much, much 
worse than they are, and I expect they will get better in OoP and 
thereafter.

Cindy (thinking the pressure is on to have Mrs. Figg be even better 
than Lupin, Black and Moody put together)