SHIP: Harry, Hermione, Ron and JKR's Split personality

[davewitley]

No: HPFGUIDX 38951

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "selah_1977" <selah_1977 at y...> wrote:
> Hello, everyone--quick re-introduction, as I haven't posted here in 
> dog years--Ebony AKA AngieJ, mostly on the Convention/Gathering and 
> Evil!Fanfic (chuckle) side of the fandom these days, but wanted to 
> poke my head back in here to respond to this:
> 

Welcome back, Ebony!  

> considering a post I made in December 2000--
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/7284
> 
> It's extremely difficult to use psychoanalytic criticism with the 
HP 
> books, as the author is living and very private with the details of 
> her personal life... not nearly as easy as doing seminar papers 
> applying Lacan to say, Mary Shelley or James Joyce.  Nevertheless, 
a 
> year and a half after I posted that theory, I really haven't 
changed 
> my mind much.  

I think I agree with your conclusion, but in a much less roundabouut 
way.  I really think it misconceived to consider that, because JKR 
has stated that in part Hermione is based on herself (and some other 
characters are based on friends and acquaintances), one can predict 
how shipping or other aspects of the story will go.  Surely JKR is 
sufficiently savvy as an author to, for example, put in two 
characters based on a real life relationship, and then have them do 
something *different*.  Surely she is capable of basing Hermione on 
herself and then thinking, "If I were in that situation, this is what 
I would do, but I'm *not* going to make Hermione do that, I'm going 
to develop her in a way that is different from mine."

So, on the one hand, I believe that autobiography is a useless guide, 
but I believe that even if we had the information Ebony refers to, we 
*still* wouldn't be in a position to make predictions.  IOW, I am 
skeptical of the value of a psychoanalytic approach to HP.

> This is why I pretty much stopped debating ship over six months ago 
> after a year of doing so.  I now believe that one cannot *prove* 
ship 
> to people, and neither should one feel compelled to do so.  
Shipping 
> is based upon a sum total of how people read the books, their RL 
> experiences, what they believe is important in love and romance, 
etc. 

> Those 
> who leaned R/H a year ago still lean that way, those who lean H/H 
> along with me still lean that way, and the no-shippers are still 
> gritting their teeth at us all.  :)

It is curious how little positions do change.  I don't think shipping 
is special in that regard, just that people care about it more.  And, 
possibly, find it harder to distinguish what they prefer from what 
they believe.  I would hate to look back on my time with HPFGU and 
say that I never wrong-footed my opponents by means of a masterful 
flip-flop in position. :-)

I would like to 'prove' shipping to *myself*, in a sense, though.  It 
is true that my position has changed little from the moment I put 
down GOF.  However, it is a lot clearer to me what my position is, 
and in the long term I would like to drag what Elkins would call my 
instinctive readings into the light of consciousness.  That is, to 
try to factor out my RL experiences and beliefs about what is 
important from my interpretation of canon.  Success could possibly be 
indicated by reading a post by Ebony or Penny, and thinking, "Yes, if 
I stood where they stand, I too would think as they think".  The 
debates here are enormously valuable for that process and mean a lot 
to me.

I have fondly imagined that my shipping posts have incrementally 
advanced in the sense of better incorporating the results of 
discussions here.  I certainly feel I have learned a lot.  To say 
that I want to move from thesis and antithesis to synthesis makes me 
sound like a philosophical poseur, but it's not far from how I 
conceive my participation in HPFGU.

David, currently away from home

(When I get back, will attempt to get back to you all on coherence, 
join in the Neville Symposium, and do a belated post on a God-like 
character in the Potterverse in response to Porphyria's Job essay)