SHIP: Sexuality in HP (WAS So, why did Snape turn on Voldermort?)

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 39934

Rochelle said:

 
> I am really confused by all of this.  I don't understand how two 
boys
> becoming fond of each other (especially when both are mature for 
their
> ages) is a deviation from anything since it HAS been known to happen
> IRL.  For one thing, what I've written isn't set in stone.  It's 
just
> one possibility out of many.  For another... couldn't the fact that 
JKR
> hasn't talked about sexuality in any real detail have more to do 
with
> her publishers and her personal goals than any actual "rules" for 
the
> world she's created?  I mean, how friendly do you think Scholastic 
would
> be towards the idea of "children's" books detailing homosexual
> relationships?  And as riled up as some people get over how the 
Harry
> Potter series will supposedly lead children into Satan worship, 
trying
> anything that really IS controversial in this series would pretty 
much
> be an invitation for death threats.
> 

I don't think homosexuality is necessarily the issue. JKR has avoided 
sexuality in general for most of the series. The only time I can 
recall anything beyond innocent little crushes -- Harry getting a 
funny feeling when he sees Cho or Hermione circling Lockhart's 
classes in hearst -- is the post-Yule Ball dance in GoF. Snape and 
Karakoff were walking around and Snape was blowing apart bushes to 
find students there. I would guess they were making out.

And any physical contact between Hermione and the boys has been 
treated as something rare and eventful. Ron panicks when Hermione 
sobs in his arms in PoA. Harry freaks when Hermione hugs him in 
SS/PS. Kisses on the cheek from Fleur nearly make the boys faint.
At the very end of GoF, JKR makes a point of telling us that this is 
the first time Hermione has ever kissed Harry on the cheek.

And we have no inkling of any of the other parts of puberty - having 
to shave faces, legs or armpits; the girls wearing bras or getting 
their periods or any unfortunate incidents where the boys REALLY 
CANNOT go to the front of Potions class to mix that serum.

No, sexuality, with rare exceptions, simply isn't a part of the Harry 
Potter world as of yet. We still have three books to go, obviously, 
so it could.

I have to disagree that the publishers are forcing sexuality out of 
the mix. Given the phenomenal success of the stories, I have to 
believe JKR has enough clout to where if she really wanted to 
introduce these issues, she could. The "Harry Potter promotes Satan" 
crowd has done absolutely nothing to curb the sales of the books, 
movies and merchandise. You could make a case such controversy has 
increased profits.

If sexuality isn't part of the books, I have to believe it's because 
JKR doesn't want it to be.


> Maybe I'm just the odd exception (but I seriously doubt I am), but 
my
> very first kiss was given to me in kindergarten, and I first 
realized I
> was attracted to... well... anyone at around age six. (There even 
was a
> woman I wanted to marry, but that's another story.) Also, judging 
from
> the way my little friends talked about boys when I was in FIRST 
GRADE,
> crushes can and often do start well before puberty.  I also remember
> how, when I was twelve, people had already started talking about
> boyfriends and girlfriends.
> 
> I'm thinking of how the REAL world works, here, and all fan fiction 
is
> based on some form of personal extrapolation.  Just because the 
author
> hasn't written about it in detail doesn't mean it can't exist.
> 


My point is that the real world and the Harry Potter world don't work 
the same way. JKR has made a point of delaying puberty. Those are the 
rules in the world she has created. It's not unlike the old Hardy 
Boys books. Yes, they had girlfriends, but frankly, they were too 
busy solving crimes to worry about nonsense like that.


> Also, as glad as I am that you enjoy the religious angle, JKR hasn't
> dealt with that in any more detail than she has with sexuality.  
Going
> by what you said about the topic of sexuality, discussion of 
religion in
> HP fan fics would be just as "invalid" as Snape kissing Remus (and
> that's all they do in my fic) when they're twelve.
> 

Ah, but JKR hasn't avoided religion altogether. She's just not 
mentioned it. That is the difference, albeit a hair-splitting one. I 
saw your introduction of religion as just that, an introduction of an 
interesting concept. I saw the discussion of sexuality among first-
years as a contradiction.

In general, I do not read fan-fiction. The real world extrapolation 
you discussed generally always stirs these arguments in me. Please 
take my comments with whatever grains of salt you need.


> <Re. the ever-popular "Snape loved Lily" theory, which I stated I'm 
not
> especially fond of>
> > 
> > On the other hand, Snape's hatred has to come from somewhere, and
> > unrequited love is as good a reason as any. All cliches start with
> > truth.
> 
> But it's still just theory, isn't it (just like practically 
everything
> else), and not necessarily based on actual canon.  What bothers me 
is
> how I've so often seen this idea treated as if it IS canon.
> 

Yes, that bothers me too. And frankly, it doesn't work with the rules 
I've adopted. Snape and James started hating each other in first-
year. By my view of the JKR world, any long-lasting unrequited love 
Snape has for Lily wouldn't be taking place that early.


> <Re. the possibility that the Marauders picked on Snape>
> >
> > From Snape's point of view, I'm sure he was persecuted unjustly. 
But
> > I doubt seriously if three of the most popular characters in the
> > series, James Potter, Sirius Black and Remus Lupin, are going to 
be
> > found to be tyrannical bullies.
> 
> Who said anything about tyranny?  I think they were just typical
> obnoxious teenage boys (and most teenage boys ARE inherently 
obnoxious
> ;)), and that Snape was one of those kids who more "normal" people 
tend
> to make fun of.  Right or wrong, that's just what happens.  If that
> turns out to be the case, I think it would be a good opportunity 
for JKR
> to show that even good people sometimes make bad choices, and that 
the
> way a child/teen is treated can affect him for the rest of his 
life. 
> Being an object or ridicule during one's adolescnece can very well
> result in his or her becoming bitter, spiteful and suspicious
> indefinitely.  For some people, the scars just don't heal.
> 

Again, though, we have to look at the era. A kid interested in Dark 
Arts during Voldemort's reign will be looked at with suspicion and 
fear. Again, it would be similar to a Nazi sympathizer in occupied 
France. Or a Taliban sympathizer in America today.

Is that entirely fair? No, it's not. But it's also completely 
understandable. We're not talking about listening to goth music or 
dressing all in black. 

We're talking about playing around in a philosophy that has killed 
Wizards and Witches. 

This is learning curses that Death Eaters have used to maim others. 
Of course that is going to spur reactions in the other students. 

Did you cringe when Malfoy and his buddies got smacked down at the 
end of GoF? Because all they were doing was expressing a different 
point of view. 

Darrin Burnett 
-- Believe it or not, I like Snape...