Defend OOTP against my horribly Muggle mind!

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 76394

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feetmadeofclay"
<feetmadeofclay at y...> 
wrote:
> Dear Grownups...(edit) 
> 
> Though it takes on the ideas of racism, parental fallibility, 
> burgeoning sexuality, and a dozen other dark parts of adult life - 
> IMO it fails to scratch beneath the surface of these ideas and 
> explore what they mean. Instead Rowling uses them more as mere plot 
> devices.  For example...I never get the feeling Hermione suffers in 
> her quest to help the elves (as abolistionists did in the 18th and 
> 19th centuries) nor does she suffer for being the victim or racism 
> 
>  So while the themes may be good, I FEEL (and I know this is a 
> personal opinion) Rowling has provided little in the way of insight 
> into these themes or the human experience.  Harry neither appears 
> traumatised nor truely in pain to me.  I want to see it the way you 
> do; try and convince me.  I'd love to change my mind.  His
suffering 
> seems nothing more than that of a bratty teen.  And while we may 
> remember being that way (I do), I can't say I felt I learned
anything 
> about what it means to be a teenager. 
> 
> Do books have to do all this?  Well IMO good books do!  That is
what 
> it means to be a good book. Otherwise why read? Reading is meant to 
> to add to our stock of experience by entertaining us.  Even light 
> parody does this by teaching us to challange what we know and read. 
> Is OOTP just brain candy or is it literature? It can't be both. 
This 
> of course doesn't mean literature (and OOTP, if it is litertature) 
> can't be fun too. (though I didn't find OOTP to be so).  I don't 
> subscribe to the school that say "no pain no gain".  But I enjoy
the 
> classics and many of the newer books I read.  Some I like more than 
> others but I think overall I rarely read bad novels.  And I like 
> children's books so that is not it...  
> 
> I will say I like things about OOTP (since I have irked people who 
> feel the need to hear the positive...). I think Rowling has talent
- 
> no question.  Whoever said Snape is great because he has a rough 
> interior to go with that gruff exterior was right... He is great. 
So 
> is Arthur Weasley.  Sweet, good, a little eccentric. But 
> uncomplicatedly decent (in the best way of course). 
 
> So I want to know what you would say to me. Please leave ad hominum 
> arguments at home.  I am well aware I could never write HP.  But it 
> isn't my job to create HP.  I am a reader and feel I have full
right 
> to judge work I could never attempt to write. Afterall I paid for 
> OOTP.  I deserve a good novel - the best one Rowling can write IMO.
 
> 
> And I would like to know if Potter is the only children's lit you
are 
> reading.  Or what books you loved as kids. And of course why... 
> 
> Thanks for all those who answer,
> Golly

I will defend to the death, (your death, naturally, I'm not *that*
stupid)
your right to dislike any book in the world.

I  may be wrong, but my impression is that your are unhappy or at
least disappointed, because OoP does not explore themes that engage
you. Fine. But no claim has been made that these themes are the raison
d'etre for the book(s).  After all, no-one complains that Peter Pan 
glosses over adolescence, or that Dickens ignores slavery.

Yes, I  do  believe that, for the most part, the themes you mention
are 
plot devices, with just a little morality added to make clear JKRs'
view-
point. I accept these as background material and context for what
is an escapist adventure/fantasy. But they are not what the books are
about, any more than War and Peace was about Napoleon.

Yes, younger readers are the target audience, and nothing puts them
off faster than being  preached or lectured at. Keep it low key, that
way
they can come to discussions about the themes in their own time.

You mention abolitionists and the like; are they relevant? There was a
posting a few weeks back where House Elves were equated to the old
Scottish myth of Brownies, which would put their situation in a very
different light and would mean Hermione has got it totally wrong. That
we won't find out till later, it is a work in progress, remember.

When the concept of "Literature" is raised, so are my hackles.
First, define literature. Then decide who has the authority to rule on
the worth of a piece of work, remembering to take into account 
changing tastes over time. Then find two people who agree with you.
It'll never happen. There are too many cliques who make arbitary
declarations (usually self-serving) on what is essentially a
subjective
judgement.

It is probably significant that much of what is regarded as literature
is either not in the modern idiom, is dense, not originally written in
English, 'experimental' (whatever that means), or puffed by fellow 
members of the same circle. It's a subtle form of snobbery - " I have
the time and leisure to consider such books, Such a pity you don't."
>From the Epic of Gilgamesh, through Beowolf, Chaucer, Swift, Austen,
Dickens, the Russians, Lawrence, Proust and Joyce down to Rushdie, 
I've read 'em - and been impressed by only a small fraction.
(Ten years in the middle of Saudi with no other entertainment.)

Whenever a book has been recommended to me as 'imparting a
message', I sigh. Usually  it means a combination of (pick any 
adjective that suits), hackneyed, trite, polemical, artificial, super-
ficial, partisan, patronising or a left wing rant. A prime example,
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists. A worthy  theme, but my
word, relentless, never-ending Nobility of the Working Class does
irritate in very short order.

Leave messages to the Post Office, that's their business. A writers
is to entertain, to engage. If they don't do that, they've failed.
The Harry Potter series does that; it has, by the only criterium
that is objective, been a resounding success. Hence HPfGU.
If you personally are left cold, I'm sorry. Maybe you've lost
your sense of wonder.

Kneasy
who raves about Marcus Aurelius, John Donne, Kipling (his Kim 
is the best childrens book I've read), Arnold Bennett, Dickens,
H.L.Mencken, Edmund Burke, David Weber and  JKR. So there!