Real characters

[marinafrants <rusalka@ix.netcom.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 50204

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z <lupinesque at y...>" 
<lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> Ebony's post, and more especially Eileen's follow-up trashing Ron 
> *and* Harry, made me think about how we tend to chew up characters 
if 
> they are less than perfect.  We're like the Donner Party at this 
> point.  After two and a half years without fresh meat, we're 
reduced 
> to cannibalism--not eating each other but munching on the 
characters 
> we've got stashed in the hold.

Well, there's only so much time you can spend going, "Wow, Harry was 
really heroic, standing up to Voldemort in the graveyard like that!" 
or "Gosh, isn't it noble of Lupin to retain his decency and 
compassion in the face of all that prejudice!"  People's vices make 
for more interesting conversation than their virtues, as anyone 
who's ever gossiped in real life will tell you. :-)

Of course, now that we've been rehashing the same damn set of flaws 
for three years, it does take on a one-dimensional flavor, no matter 
how many times we add the PACMAN disclaimer.  Perfectly angelic 
character do make for crappy reading, yes, but so do a bunch of 
worthless jerks.  JKR has skillfully avoided falling into either 
trap when she wrote the books, and hopefully we can avoid falling 
into the same traps when we discucss them. Painting Ron and Harry as 
a couple of insensitive gits is just as simplistic as painting them 
as a couple of perfect saints.  

Maybe *that's* the real reason for Snape's popularity.  His flaws 
are so numerous and varied that we're only just now beginning to 
exhaust them; and while he is shown to have positive and even heroic 
qualities, he's still presented as an unlikable antagonist in the 
books, so we can bash him without the nagging guilt that comes with 
bashing a character we know the author intends us to like. 

As for Ron and Harry's behavior toward Neville, I find it consistent 
with the way I've seen most normal (meaning neither especially 
saintly nor especially horrible) teenage boys will behave toward a 
basically decent but totally uncool peer: they're nice to him when 
he's in immediate, visible distress (like the trick step or Malfoy's 
Leg-locker curse), but they don't take him seriously or want to be 
bothered with him under ordinary circumstances.  I often wish they 
wouldd behave better, not just toward Neville but also in general, 
but I don't find their actions sickening.  I've seen teenage 
behavior that I consider sickening, and have been the target of 
some, and have probably commited some, and Harry and Ron are small 
potoatoes in that respect.  Could they be nicer? Certainly.  But 
JKR's consistent and steadfast refusal to make any of the trio nicer 
than most kids their age could be reasonably expected to be is, IMO, 
one of her greatest successes as a writer.  

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com