[HPforGrownups] Digest Number 3344

Wed Jul 16 15:23:47 UTC 2003

No: HPFGUIDX 70883

>  Darrell Harris [tigerfan41 at yahoo.com]
>
> > This is a cogent reply. It makes much of the case for
>most of us.  I would like to add my two cents and that
>I am sure is more than my comment shall be worth.
>I am at a loss to understand the bitterness of the
>debate. If you think the evolution of the story and
>characters is unreal and deeply troubling thus making
>the series unfit why continue reading it much less try
>to bring rabid fans to your way of thought.
>
>Now me:
>
>I can't, of course, answer for TAS but I personally wouldn't dream of 
>trying
>to convert anybody to my way of thought. It's just that for me, how I enjoy
>a book is by dissecting it. What did I love about this one? What did I hate
>about this one? Where do I think the author is going? What are the 
>strengths
>and weaknesses of the book as a whole? For me, that's the exact same as
>dissecting which room will be the most important or whether Snape was in
>love with Lily. Critique, IMHO, is a nod to a book's/series' overall
>quality. If the overall quality wasn't there I wouldn't waste my time.
>
Anne:  you've hit on some really important points here.  The whole mark of 
great literature is how much it lends itself to critique (which can be 
positive and can be negative) and analysis.  I also feel that Americans  are 
overly and wrongly enamored of a desire for passive, non-thinking 
entertainment.  Your brain is more active asleep than it is when watching 
TV.

I refuse to get involved in anything on-going any more - movie series, TV, 
books - wherein I do not engage in some kind of "throughput" - writing 
fanfic, being on an email list, participating in discussion groups - because 
I simply don't have that kind of time to be intellctually lazy.  My mind 
needs to be in gear most of my waking moments - and frankly, I'm happier 
that way and not as prone to mild depression.  Boredom is so escapable.  HP 
is compelling to me because it provokes the kind of thought and analysis 
that lends to the high traffic on this list.  I have to confess myself less 
than thrilled with lists that are all about "loved it" or "hated it" 
superficial reactions.

And as for trying to persuade anyone else to one's point of view...heck, we 
all do it to some degree.  :-)  Why be dishonest?  Otherwise we wouldn't put 
it out there, in words and type, for all to see.  I personally don't think 
there's anything remotely wrong with it, as long as it's not accomplished 
through force or belittlement; we all hold the opinions we hold (well, 
mostly) for well-informed and thoughtful reasons.  There's no shame in 
learning from each other, none at all.  I know I've learned a few things 
here - and that's said with confidence and absolutely no shame in my 
original views or my beliefs or mores.

>Now Darrell again:
>
> > I notice
>many espousing the theory that OOP proves JKR is not
>the talented writer we self deluted ones think she is.
>OK, but I still like the books.
>
>Now me:
>
>But aren't you taking all this a little personally? Don't you welcome the
>opportunity to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a book you love? I
>consider myself just as much a rabid JKR fan as the next person, and I
>certainly consider her a talented writer. I just think that in this last
>book, the pressure is showing. By pointing out a weakness, I'm not trying 
>to
>say you're self-deluded, I'm trying to talk about the book. I don't know
>what TAS is doing.
>
I think *some* of it is "taking it a little personally" (I guess maybe 
taking things "personally" is why many people become rabid - I personally 
;-) manage to hold things at arm's length and don't do the "you don't like 
my idea so therefore you don't like my 'kind'" unless I have no choice) - 
but I think some of it is the burlesqued hyperbole of slamming something 
down a slippery slope to its polar opposite - which is silly, at least in 
terms of trying to prove one's point.  It's a common rhetorical tactic.  
There was no need to say "we self-deluded ones", et al.  I think that JKR is 
a good storyteller over all - I think some of her writing is *technically* a 
little redundant, but I don't think that's a major failing - I think her 
great strengths lie in creating her main characters and in her ability to 
create a fantasy world that is completely palatable and fulfills just about 
every child's vision of someplace where they have magical powers and a 
supportive environment for the most part, and in her clever use of cultural 
references.

>Darrell again:
>
> > If I wanted to read a
>story of a deeply disturbed child dealing with
>horrible trauma by acting out I'm sure I could find
>that. I however am lost in the world of a child who
>has the strength of character to rise above things I
>could not. If the writing is not as refined as others
>oh well. I must not be adept enough to know or care. I
>don't try to push you to read it if it isn't appealing
>to you. Why do you feel you must try to lessen it for
>me?
>
>Back to me one last time:
>
>It's appealing for me. I'm just wondering why you think the focus of the
>literary criticisms is on you - on changing your mind or lessening your
>enjoyment. Everybody enjoys a book in their own way.
>
>Anne
>
I wondered the same thing, Anne.  If you don't enjoy reading critiques and 
criticisms, then don't read them.  And I wonder how someone else's opinion 
can lessen your enjoyment of the reading if you truly don't agree with it?

Felinia

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail