Why to Like and Not Like OoP

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 70968

--- 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. 


bboy_mn (who will try to play nice):

Well, it's very hard to have a debate or even a discussion when
everybody agrees. In fact, that's usually when the debate/discussion
stops; once issues have been resolved and people are in agreement.

You say that to intelligent criticism and reasonable critique, you 
get only opposition and blank approval. What were you expecting; no
opposition and enthusiastic approval? 

Let's make note of the posting rules for this group. Posts that simply
say 'me too' or 'I agree' are forbidden even if you can stretch them
out to a paragraph or two, because they are a pointless waste of
electrons and add nothing to the discussions. That tends to encourage
opposing views, and some of the best discussions that occur here are
between heated opposing views. Dead boring hearing people who agree
talk to each other. 

Although, I will at that it is quite possible to agree and add to the
discussion; it happens all the time, but 'me too' even stretched to a
couple paragraph isn't quite enough.

Sadly, it is my opinion and just my opinion, that no opposition and
enthusiastic approval is exactly what you were looking for, and are
now chewing on sour grapes because you didn't get it. Remember, that's
just my opinion, and not a statement of fact.

I do see definite and clear intellectual process in addition to a
clear path of logic in your posts, in other word, well thought out,
well formed, and well stated, so I'm not doubting you in those areas,
I simple think you are wrong. That thought on my part isn't absolute
truth, just my opinion. Consequently, you are not likely to get 'no
opposition' and 'enthusiastic approval' from me. But I would love to
debate and discuss with you.


1.) Harry's attitude-
Sorry, but I can see a very likely and reasonable path of logic and
psychology to justify Harry's attitude. He's been through a very
tramatic experience, more that that, he is the person who was at the
very core of that tramatic experience, it all centered around him, and
he has been left to stew in a boiling cauldron of unresolved emotion
and turmoil. Then to top it off, everything and everyone he has
counted on to bring that boiling cauldron back down to a simmer, has
failed him. No contact, no news, unsatisfying letter from Ron and
Hermione, who by the way are together without him, unsatisfying
letters from Sirius, no contact with Dumbledore, miserable Dursley, no
one to talk to. He just been hung out to dry, totally unsupported.
Angry? You bet he's angry, and justifiably so! Even I was angry.

You do acknowledge that people do get angry, but that their anger
usually recedes; it doesn't hang on for a full year (greatly
paraphrased). But the very people, places, and things that Harry is
counting on to bring his emotions down to a managable simmer are
instead inflaming his emotions; limited information from the Order,
Umbridge at school, banned from Quidditch, extra classes with Snape,
girl trouble. Even one reassuring look from Dumbledore would go a long
way to calming him, but that look never comes, so Harry is never
calmed. Of course, we later learn that Dumbledore has his own
misguided reasons for his action.

Continued anger? Of course, when you inflame the anger of an angry man
for some odd reason, he continues to be anger, and amazingly, he
actually becomes more angry. Who knew? (<-sarcasm)

I also see Harry's actions and reactions as consistent with his
personality as shown throughout the full length of the story. You may
see it as inconsistent, but it make perfect sense to me, and I found
it all very reasonable and believable.


2.) Ron state of mind-
Same here, I see a clear and reasonable path of logic and pschology to
justify and explain Ron actions throughout the story. It all seem very
reasonable to me. 

Look at Ron's initial reaction to being made a Prefect. Is he jumping
for joy? Is he expressing the same extreme pleasure are Hermione? No,
he is very reserved and withdrawn about it. Certainly he is honored,
and happy that his mother is rewarding him with a broom, but his
primary reaction reflects a degree of uncertainty and insecurity.

Let's look at two incidences; Ron meets Harry on the train and the
Mirror of Erised. Ron meets Harry and expresses his insecurity and
frustration with trying to live up to his older brothers. It's been
done, so he has a lot to live up to. It's been done before, so even if
he does it, it's not going t mean much. Damned if you do, and damned
if you don't; a pretty gloomy doomy attitude. 

Now Ron is made prefect, the first logical step to being Head Boy, one
of his mirror of deepest desire visions. But the first step has put
him on a path, pushed him toward a goal that while he wants it, he is
not sure he can live up to it. In other words, he is very insecure
about whether he is good enough.

Now, a chance to try for the Quidditch team comes up. Does he tell
anyone he wants to try out? Does he turn to his friends for support?
No, he keeps quite and practices in secret. Why? Because now he is
facing the second part of his 'deepest desire' vision of greatness.
There is an old say, 'you can never fail, if you never try'. Ron is
facing a version of this. He has desperate desire, but he also has
deep fear of failure. Fear of failure usually does not instill a lot
of confidence in a person, and Ron is consistently NOT confident
throughout this book, and to some degree the entire story.

But Ron gets on the Quidditch team, and he is set up to achieve his
two greatest dreams, and equally or much more so in his mind, setup to
be a miserable failure who isn't even a fraction of his greatly
admired brothers. 

Fred and George compound this by undermining Ron's Prefectship. Fred
and George are admired as school troublemakers and outlaws. Ron
seriously doubt that he can achieve the levels of his much older
brothers (Bill and Charlie), and not that he is a Prefect, he is
doomed from achieving fame as an outlaw like Fred and George.

That is a personallity arc that stretches consistently from the very
beginning of the story to the end (the current end).


3.) Boys and Girls-
This thread is so long and complex, that I can't remember if this was
touched on, but none the less, I will touch on it.

I found the portrayal of boys and girls, and relationships to be right
on the money. I can understand the insecurity of Harry. I can
understand the psychology of Cho. 

I can even understand Hermione's seemingly overly deep insight into
OTHER PEOPLE'S relationships. I emphasize 'other people's' because I
don't think Hermione has even remotely close to the same insight into
her own intimate relationships. 

4.) Speaking of Hermione-
As many many people who dearly love Hermione have argued, she is far
from perfect, although she does a good job of trying to keep a prefect
'face'.

I'm not going to go into detail because this post and this thread are
already very very long. But I see few inconsistencies, even give the
arguements against her, in Hermione's personality or her insights.
It's very easy for Hermione to have deep insight into other people's
actions and motivations simply because for an intelligent insightful
person, it is much easier to understand and solve other people's
problem than it is to solve your own. Just ask me, I do it all the
time. The reason, obviously, is that you have no emotional attachment
or investment in other people's problems.

5.) Sirius-
Again, without getting into detail, I see a consistent arc of
personality through the whole series. I see his actions in OoP, as
consistent and understandable.


6.) The book-

Is 'Order of the Phoenix' the best book that JKR ever wrote? No. Many
many people will agree with me on that. I suspect that most people who
provide counter arguements to your original post would also agree with
that. But many many people will also agree that 'Chamber of Sercret'
was not the best book.

But we are looking at table full of magnificent 20 carat diamonds and
picking our favorties. We each have our opinion of what is the most
appealing shape, cut, and color of diamond, but even given that
preference, it's hard to deny that they all sparkle magnificently.

So, I agree, 'Order of the Phoenix', IN MY OPINION, is not the best
book in the series, but it was still very satifying while a the same
time leaving me hungry for more. 

7.) Alternate view-

Another way of looking at it is that SS/PS is the introduction to the
series. 

In CoS, which is not the best book, JKR had to find was to work clues
and setups into the story, PoA and GoF are the exhilarating payoffs
for the clues and setups in CoS. 

OoP, which again is not the best book, is a new beginning, and by
JKR's own words is crammed full of setups for the next two books.

Sorry, but I think I spot a pattern here, and that pattern is OK book
with setups spawns two great books. That means we've got two great
books waiting in the wings to 'WOW' us. Sadly, the first of those
great books is a year or two (or worse, three) away.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

bboy_mn