[HPforGrownups] Re: Why to Like and Not Like OoP

Wed Jul 16 14:13:11 UTC 2003

No: HPFGUIDX 70858

>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "m.steinberger" <steinber at z...>
>wrote:
> > It is a shame that HP4GU has become a place where intelligent
>criticism of HP feels unwelcome. No one is nasty, but the only
>responses one gets to reasonable critique are opposition from fans or
>blank approval from fellow anti-fans (for lack of a better word to
>describe former HP fans who are now disappointed). Delving into
>HP's problems doesn't happen.
> >
>
>   It is also a shame that those with critisism of Oop feel that their
>critiques are above critisism. You have felt the need to pre-defend
>yourself twice in this post. The first one above and this one "And
>before you argue about whether they are realistic or not, let's
>hear from some people who work in counseling with kids and adults who
>have been through real-life equivalents of what these characters have
>been through."
>  Obviously you are not one of the counselors or adults you call upon
>to defend your argument of characters, yet you felt competent enough
>to comment on their realism. Don't tell others they can't.
>
I can completely sympathize with what you call a pre-defense, from the 
following standpoint:  it would be more useful if the so-called "critiques" 
concentrated on the literary merits and plot structures and characters 
rather than on the merits of the writers - because the latter, on the 
Internet, can lend a sense of what we call "flamage" to the proceedings.  
The writer you were quoting and responding to - and I actually agree with 
the gist of some of your points, but more mildly - was asking not to be 
fussed at personally.  I think it would have been nice if you'd adhered to 
that request, not just over the one poster, but in the interest of keeping 
the tone more level and balanced.  After all, if you want all who post their 
views to feel respected, no matter how supported or not, no matter how 
professional or un, the best way to create that tone is to lead by example.  
Note that I'm not yelling nor talking in a sniping tone of voice - I just 
think this is a weaker case for "everybody has a right to their opinion" 
than it might have been, due to the ad hominem addition.  I'm willing to 
believe that you're just frustrated with a buildup, etc.

I think the original poster is probably trying to take advantage of an 
opportunity for a little education - something I do a lot on here - because 
it's not that the posters seem unintelligent to me, but a few of them are 
relatively young, and quite a few seem exposed to only mass media and pop 
psych images of how human beings work.  You note JKR as a master storyteller 
below (and quite a few of my friends criticize her for being "too 
derivative" of other authors!!! believe it or not) - one of my hopes is that 
her work will be appreciated on the many levels that it can be, and that her 
work will continue its trend of helping to shake the lamentable created 
taste of Americans for "mindless entertainment" and get brains in gear 
again.  :-)  I, for one, don't just let stuff wash over me - I identify what 
resonates within me and identify how it compares with my own experiences.  
The idea of wanting to simply passively take any random stimuli in 
unprocessed is alien and repugnant to me.

>  I wrote a long post that I deleted accidentally in response to this
>post. I am going to make this one shorter and deal with your supposed
>character flaws as they relate to Harry Potter and Ron Weasley. You
>state that "To be realistic, Harry ought to be suffering from Post-
>Traumatic Stress Disorder, after the graveyard scene combined with
>the severe lack of emotional support afterwards." To be realistic
>Post- Traumatic Stress Disorder is a rather new pshycological
>disorder. Also, to be realistic Harry exhibits none of the pre-
>cursors typical of children suffering from post-truamatic stress
>disorder.

Note:  PTSD is *not* itself new.  *The identification* of it as a discrete 
and somewhat treatable psychological disorder is.  PTSD itself is as old as 
the human race.

Harry is not written as suffering from PTSD, but to be frank, if they 
identified such a thing as PTSD in the WW, he probably *would* be diagnosed 
as such if his elders knew everything about the dreams he'd been having, and 
the waking up with shouting nightmares - that is a classic and recurring 
PTSD symptom, as it so happens.  A subtle distinction and one that really 
makes no never-mind, but it's interesting this particular disorder should 
get mentioned.  Harry's nightmares are a result of the link/ possession of 
Voldemort, but they could easily have gotten misdiagnosed if anyone were 
looking for that - starting as it did after Cedric's death in the graveyard.
>
>  In the case of Ron. Ron is exhibibiting the typical behavior of a
>boy in his circumstances. Here are few things you might of missed in
>your attempt to be overly critical and turn Ron into a cardboard
>characiture. First of all, I will start with Ron's background and
>upbringing prior to Hogwarts. Ron is the sixth of seven children. He
>is the last boy in his family to enter Hogwarts. His older brothers
>have already made their mark. Ron states this when he first meets
>Harry on the Hogwarts Express. Ron believes he has a lot to live to
>up to. In his first year at Hogwarts HRH stops Voldemort. In his
>second, third and fourth year he continues to show outstanding
>courage and genius. In his fifth year he tries out for the Quidditch
>team. There was never an opening before. He makes the team by showing
>some talent. Yet he is uncomfortalble in his role. He has a lot to
>live up to. You state that Ron should still exhibit some self doubt
>about his new role as quiddicth hero but remember it was the last
>game of the year. He will probably exhibit some anxiety in the first
>game next year.
>
>   Your expectations for character development are "unrealistic." You
>take a less than layman's knowledge of psychosis and try to dissect a
>master storyteller's characters. I do believe JKR is a master
>storyteller. I know her books are classics in my house. I will read
>them time and time again to my kids. I am sure others will too, that is a 
>classic. In closing, please stop comparing Rowling with other
>modern or classic literature. Comparison is beneath true literary
>critisism (yet every non-JKR fan does it, another reason I loathe
>them).
>
I'd suggest saving loathing for more worthy targets like wife-beaters and 
child-molesters.  :-)  c'mon:  comparison is an inevitable part of human 
nature - so it gets done.  I'm not crazy about it, either, and believe in 
trying to take things on their own merit as much as possible:  but the fact 
is, human beings learn through cognition and patterning.  A lot of works get 
compared to JKR's universe right now, even if the link is tenuous at best, 
*to try to make them commercial successes*.  No other reason.  It's 
marketing trying to capture JKR's audience, starved between books and movies 
and newly interested in reading.

You mentioned JKR being a classic master storyteller:  her themes are broad 
and epic, to be certain.  Most of her background, secondary characters are 
caricatures, there to serve a textual purpose and drive the plot up until 
now; I'm delighted to see the development that some like Neville and Ginny 
got on this pass.  I think that, due to the size and theme and development 
of the main characters, she's gone that way; and that's why I tend to get 
impatient with the overanalysis of the background people.  I'm much more 
interested in the main characters - especially Snape, who is one of the 
best-written characters in the series, and indeed in at least a decade.  The 
other thing about JKR:  she is a *master* at sliding in sly word play and 
pop cultural references.  My favorite:  JKR is obviously a Mel Gibson fan.  
Why do I say this?  The stack of "Martin Miggs, the Mad Muggle" comix on 
Ron's bedroom floor.  Martin Miggs = Martin Riggs, Mel Gibson's character in 
the 'Lethal Weapon' series - and he was supposed to be crazy on the police 
force, that was why no one wanted to work with him until Danny Glover's 
character.

And...while not a professional, I was a sociology grad student before I had 
to leave due to lack of funds; and I've got much of the written work 
assembled to challenge to get in for a Master's in Children's Literature.  
So I think I might fit the bill, at least on what both of you *say*, to say 
"I hear points in what both of you say - but let's not lose sight of it in 
ad hominem garbage".  :-)

Pax,
Felinia

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963