Ron: ambition, bickering, SHIP

[davewitley]

No: HPFGUIDX 38718

From: Penny Linsenmayer pennylin at swbell.net

I see now I'm well behind - the penalty of using digests to minimise 
hotel phone bills, but I'll post this anyway and come back later, as 
AFAICS it's still relevant.

I'll just chip in on Barb's arguments.

>Ron -- Again, he *is* ambitious IMO. 

I'm in broad agreement with Barb that Ron isn't really ambitious: he 
complains and expresses desire, but I would see it as a fairly 
fundamental characteristic of ambitious people that they take steps 
to realise their ambitions, and, by and large, Ron doesn't.

However, this argument may miss your point, which I believe is that 
Ron would resent a successful Hermione if he himself has nothing to 
show.  He might then start to berate himself (or her) for his *lack* 
of ambition.  It would depend on the kind of success Hermione has.  I 
agree that Ron does lack a sense of the foundation of his value 
(despite all that has been written about his loving family), and as 
long as that is the case, he is likely to be a bad partner for anyone 
(I am a firm disbeliever in the notion that poor self worth can be 
compensated for, or cured, by the right relationship.  I think it has 
to be sorted out first.).  However, it is obvious (nasty word that) 
to me that Ron is indeed worthy of being valued - indeed his presence 
in the narrative is possibly primarily to counter the notion that 
value depends on what your gifts are or what you contribute to an 
enterprise.

OTOH, if Hermione is destined to land the coveted position of her SO, 
then she is in for a rough ride, if that person is human.  That would 
place a strain on any relationship, whichever partner did the landing.

Now my arguments:

Penny said: <<<<> I think bickering is the defining characteristic of 
their relationship; it's how they interact.>>>>

I said:

><<<<<<<<Now here we have a straight difference over what is written 
in canon. I see plenty of bickering, but 'defining characteristic' - 
not me. We need Amy's list.>>>>>>>>>>

>I don't think this entirely something we can settle by just 
consulting canon. What I interpret as bickering may differ markedly 
from what is bickering as far as you're concerned. I think it's a 
subjective thing in the end. 

If the subjectivity is in the definition of bickering, then we should 
be able to go back to the books and look at their behaviour, whatever 
we call it.  However, I suspect that the important subjective element 
is in the templates of human personality we use to interpret the 
words on JKR's page.  I think it is these templates, which arise from 
our own lives and our other reading, that influence differing 
interpretations of statements like 'I hate being poor'. (As an aside, 
that incident is interesting because it jolts Hermione out of her 
normal agenda of improving him - she (and Harry) is silenced in the 
face of a problem too big for them.)

However, let's have a go.  If bickering is the 'defining 
characteristic', I understand that to mean that when they see each 
other, the primary thing they see is the areas of disagreement.  As 
an extreme, it might mean that each of them adopts the views they do, 
simply because they believe the other has the opposite view - I take 
it this is not what is understood.  More plausibly, whenever they are 
together, they choose topics for discussion because they know those 
topics will antagonise the other and cause an argument.  That is 
harder to refute, because I think it is true that it is a running 
sore for each of them that the other has given so little ground in 
the areas where they do disagree, but I still think that the reason 
they return to these sore points is because they want the 
satisfaction of knowing the other thinks their opinion counts.

In that respect there is a parallel between Draco's vulnerability to 
Hermione and Hermione's vulnerabilty to Ron: they want to win, and 
the more of themselves they engage in winning, the more they are 
engaging themselves in their opponent. (Also R to H, but nobody 
questions that, AFAIK.)

I believe that their opposing opinions fill a large part of their 
daily interaction, but at moments of crisis or revelation, other 
considerations bulk larger.  Again, the parallel with Draco is 
illuminating: so far, crisis has put him on the opposite side, at 
least nominally.

David