Defend OOTP against my horribly Muggle mind!

[zesca]

No: HPFGUIDX 77093

"feetmadeofclay" wrote:

> Only Rowling could make 
> me think 'Hermione Granger' is a perfectly normal name for the girl 
> next door. 

madeyemood:
Strange but true. How does she *do* that?

> feetmadeofclay:
> I love all the names of the places and the people. I even 
> like 'Shacklebolt'.  

 madeyemood:
It even feels satisfying in the mouth.

 
> > < madeyemood>
> > In a way this makes Hermione an even more culturally relevant 
> > character. 
> > How do we stay conscious during these multicultural times in which 
> > social inequities are more subtle? 
> 
> feetmadeofclay:
> Well... <snip> I fear she has little 
> desire to be such a subtle writer. She's very attached to the 
> boldness of charicature.  It isn't a bad thing but it might get in 
> the way of developing more subtle themes. 

madeyemood:
Whereas I feel that Rowling has succeeded here. Hermione is trying to come 
to terms with a difficult concept without the help of a mentor. I find her (both 
Hermione's and JKR's) mistakes a little beautiful.

> feetmadeofclay:
>Look at how much time was spent on developing Umbridge versus 
> Hermione's ongoing interaction (or non interaction) with the elves. 

madeyemood:
I do notice this problem with proportion: like, almost every chapter having 
something to do with Umbridge. Okay! She's toad-like! Got it! But there's this 
way I'm still into the books. They just don't bug me, for the most part, except 
when it comes to grammatical faux pas. And even that's much less of a deal 
than it would have been for me a decade ago. For now I'm suspending critical 
faculties and skating on Rowling's sheer, gleeful inspiration. I find her books 
satisfying as a gestalt experience. They seem channelled, like some wacky 
New Age prophecy.

> <feetmadeofclay said> <
> Of course only time will tell...  But I have my doubts. I am sure the 
> elves will be important plotwise, but I am not sure there will be any 
> effectively drawn comment on Hermione's views.   

madeyemood:
Were DD's words to Harry about Kreacher at all helpful? For me the elves are 
a pretty amazing component of the WW. And I profess a distinct fondness for 
the water coming out of the ears of the fountain elf.

> > > <feetmadeofclay said> <
> > > Is OOTP just brain candy or is it literature?

> > <now madeyemood>
> > Perhaps neither?
> > For me it's rather more candified than literary, but maybe really, really 
> > great candy? Like those Godiva dark chocolate scallop shells with 
> > the soft  hazelnut mousse in the inside?
> > 
> > <feetmadeofclay says>
> Oooo I like that - very funny.  Not good for you - but certainly more 
> respectable than a kitkat.  

madeyemood:
Interesting word, respectable.   




> <feetmadeofclay said>
> We may not be reading becuase of what the press is saying at all.  

madeyemood:
This isn't absolutely true for me. I seek resonance from reviews, as well as 
deeper insight. But it's not as if anyone could even stop me from reading 
something I like, or get me to read something I don't.

I'm familiar with this phenomenon of academics becoming furious at popular 
writers, even if those popular writers are academics as well. Wendy Donniger 
(who supposedly wrote a cool Potter article for some classy London rag) is a 
brilliant, innovative scholar who freaked when Joseph Campbell became so 
popular. The triumph of the mediocre! cried she. And she was right, but sort of 
missing another sort of point, imho.

I guess I'm not an either/or kind of gal. I can eat a range of things and they 
don't all have to provide maximum nutrition.

> <feetmadeofclay said>
> I found the emphasis on what Byatt deemed magic SHOULD be to be 
> unwarranted. I'm closer to thinking Hensher got it right by being 
> more charitable to the goals of the work.

madeyemood:
I'm not familiar with Hensher. 
> 
> 
> > <now madeyemood>
> > There certainly are "better" books than Potter out there, 
> > for sure. But this is a special sort of cultural phenomenon. I could see 
> > a Chekhov play instead of watching "6 Feet Under", but I'd rather 
> > participate in a more culturally relevant experience. Besides, Peter 
> > Krause is hot. But I digress...

> <feetmadeofclay said> < 
> LOL!  That is true as well. I never watched Smallville for its deep 
> characters or sophisticated themes.

madeyemood:
Oh, my dear, now I must object to the quality of 6 Feet Under being made 
analogous to that of Smallville. I simply must. You see, I can be judgemental!


> <feetmadeofclay said> < 
> I think the only way to keep me from becoming a weary media lemming 
> (what can I say - I'm weak)  is for people within communities 
> (whatever they are - political, literary etc...) to use said media to 
> challange the status quo. 
> 
> Status quo was that the new Potter was sublime and Rowling was better 
> than ever.  Byatt simply had a different view.  A good media bounds 
> the ball around and makes us think. 

madeyemood:
I wouldn't go so far as to say that Byatt was wrong. I guess I don't share her 
values. I don't need something to be aesthetically immaculate to deeply enjoy 
it. I am a fan of a number of forms of expression. Also, I don't relate to the idea 
of my opinions being strongly shaped by the media in that particular way. And 
yes, I'm all for active, open debate.

I objected to Byatt's claim that there was something wrong about our passion 
for Potter indicating an adolescent quality. I found it fascinating to observe, 
then boorish of her to judge. I guess I don't believe that everyone is supposed 
to be so grown up.  

Thanks for the copious response, Golly! I hope you can find mine among the 
masses of other messages.

madeyemood