OOP: Disappointing AND Excellent

[joywitch_m_curmudgeon]

No: HPFGUIDX 67278

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z" <lupinesque at y...> wrote:
> I am enjoying it much more on the second read, as I expected.  It's 
> bearing out my analysis that my first reading was marred by the 
> depression that results from having to absorb too much 
> unfamiliarity.  For one thing, the "character" I love best, 
Hogwarts, 
> is barely recognizable--though it still shows in sparks like the 
> teachers' resistance to Umbridge and all the delicious details of 
> classes and trappings

I've only just started my second time thru, but I am also enjoying 
OoP much more this time thru.  I'm hoping it will help answer some of 
my question about my reaction to my first reading, since I can't help 
wondering why my disappointment and depression were so intense the 
first time thru.  Was it just the unfamiliarity of it, as Amy 
suggests?  Or am I, like a lot of us fanatics, just so incredibly 
wrapped up emotionally with these characters that we overidentify to 
the point of misery?  Or was the book genuinely inferior and 
depressing.  I have no idea.

>And I 
> love this angry Harry--it's about time he got really, really pissed 
> about what a raw deal he's gotten--but it was still hard to listen 
to 
> him.  Now that that's not all brand-new, I can settle in and really 
> appreciate it.

Yeesh.  I hope I wind up feeling the same way.  Harry's unhappiness 
was so intense that it made me unhappy most of the way thru my first 
reading.
 
> She shows real nerve in writing so vividly about loss.  Really, did 
> anyone think for a moment that Sirius would appear in that mirror?  
> He's DEAD.  Even if he had had it in his pocket when he sank beyond 
> the veil, the meaning of being beyond the veil is that no one can 
> talk to you ever again.  JKR doesn't cheat; she doesn't sugarcoat 
the 
> finality of death; when she brings people back from the dead it's 
> only to make it more painful--J&L talking to Harry in the 
graveyard.  
 
All the more intriguing that she did so despite the fact that (IMO 
and don't kill me, Penny) I still believe that she is writing 
primarily for children.

> One of my very favorite bits so far was effective precisely 
*because* 
> JKR didn't spell out what was happening inside the character:  
> 
>   "He didn't want to go at all!" Harry said angrily.
>   Hagrid bowed his great shaggy head.
>   "Nah, I don' reckon he did," he said quietly.  "But still, 
> Harry . . . he was never one ter sit around at hoem an' let other 
> people do the fightin'.  He couldn' have lived with himeself if he 
> hadn' gone ter help--"
>   Harry leapt up again.
>   "I've got to go and visit Ron and Hermione in the hospital wing," 
> he said mechanically
> 
> and off he goes before Hagrid can even say goodbye.  Hagrid's upset 
> but we don't know if he understands what he's done to make Harry 
> leave.

I thought this scene captured perfectly not only the poignancy of 
Harry's inconsolability at his loss, but that sense of teenage 
alienation and angst where nothing, noone, nowhere offers you what 
you need to be able to deal with the pain of living your life.

> What did bother me, as usual, was the backstory writing.  She did 
it 
> much better than in PA or, God knows, GF <cringes anew at the 
visions 
> of Ron and Hermione reacting to the news of his scar hurting, 
> complete with long nose . . . argh>.  But I really think no one 
would 
> follow OP who hadn't read GF; I guess she is writing all that stuff 
> about the graveyard for those who HAVE read GF but only once, three 
> years ago (I do have to remind myself that such people exist), but 
it 
> bugs me.  And anyone who doesn't already know that Voldemort killed 
> Harry's parents but couldn't kill him should have their literacy 
> license revoked, and certainly shouldn't be sold a copy of OOP 
> (chapter 4).  And she still feels the need to tell us physical 
> characteristics, as if it makes the slightest difference that Bill 
> has a ponytail, or as if we won't get the whole picture of Arthur 
> unless we are reminded that he's redhaired and balding.  I 
understand 
> why physical characteristics are a part of initial descriptions, 
and 
> JKR usually does that part very well.  But repeating them 
constantly 
> is just silly.  At least she didn't tell us about the scar in the 
> opening description of Harry.

Yeh, of course you're right, Amy, it is annoying, but this is where, 
to me, it is clear that she is writing for kids.  Kids often don't 
remember or understand the details.  She's not writing for us, ahem, 
somewhat older, nitpicking fanatics who read each book at least twice 
a year.

Deb: 
> > I was still annoyed with the gender characterization in OOP.  JKR 
> >did demonstrate that there are women in significant Ministry 
> >positions, but the only one that gets developed is unrelentingly 
> >evil.  In fact, she's given us two Evil Women.  

Amy: 
> Well, that's progress, for JKR.  We haven't had much in the way of 
> Evil Women, and if she throws in enough female stereotypes then her 
> gender characterization will cease to be stereotypical--just as 
> currently, men take enough different shapes that although many are 
> stereotyped, they aren't tokenized.
 
[snip analysis of positive aspects of JKR's female characters]

I agree that her female characterizations are improving, but why are 
the women in the HP books so stereotyped?  It's never made sense to 
me, given what we know about JKR.

> As a sidenote, I love the way JKR all but equates crimes against 
good 
> taste with crimes against humanity; a cutesy style of dress and 
> cheesy wall decorations are a sure sign that someone's a barely-
> closeted sadist.  Remember her drawing of the Dursleys' living room 
> and how she ranted about ugly white vases?  

I just love this, too, although she takes it to offense extremes, 
e.g. her dislike of fat people.

> Of course, she owes an 
> apology to those readers who actually like gamboling-kittens 
> collectors' plates. 

Amy the cat-lover takes on JKR the cat-hater!

Deb: 
> >Molly, OTOH, is shown as the OOP member in charge of the 
> >headquarters housecleaning team. 

Amy:
> But it isn't housecleaning; as Harry observes, it's a war.  

Codswallop, it's housecleaning, wizarding world style.  Molly is the 
stereotypical overbearing mother and housewife -- I don't think 
there's any way around that.

Deb:
> > Neville -- I was totally wrong about Neville; I didn't want to 
see 
> him kicking DE butt, but JKR pulled it off in a truly wonderful way.

Amy: 
> I agree completely.  I didn't feel that he was Embracing the 
Warrior 
> Ethic (though JKR definitely has no tolerance for at least one kind 
> of pacifism, the [IMO] false pacifism that is appeasement--note the 
> chapter titles of the DADA textbook).  He was the Neville we know 
and 
> love but with a depth of feeling that we've known was there since 
his 
> sleepless nights in GF, and with a determination to take action 
> that's always been there but must now take the form of learning 
> Defense, not just getting in the Trio's way when they're headed out 
> of bounds.  

I think that her further development of Neville makes it even clearer 
that Neville will play an extremely important role in the final 
whatever-the-hell-it-is she has planned for book 7.

--Joywitch