Why to Like and Not Like OoP

[m.steinberger]

No: HPFGUIDX 71107


> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> --- 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?

Hello? Elaboration? Critique? Analysis? Related Observations? Etc?

Rather than, "You're just a sourpuss because you wanted Harry to be a
sweetiepie all his life." Or, "Yay! Someone else hates OoP too!"

> 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 think you will see in the replies I have made to the replies I have gotten
that this not the case. I have conceded points gladly and expressed
appreciation for apt observations, and defended what I felt needed
defending.

>
> 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.
>
I've responded to these kind of responses so many times in the past two days
that I don't have strength anymore. If the list were less flooded I'd tell
you to go look for them. Maybe a search on m.steinberger or asandhp will get
you to them easily. Also to the point is the opinion I posted about two
weeks ago about how Harry's inability to even begin moving himself out of
his anger is unreasonable. It seems that JKR decided to make Harry angry
first and worked the plot around it afterwards. In any case, the synopsis of
my opinion is that people in the world act like Harry, but people with
Harry's former personality and experiences would normally act much better or
much worse.

Besides (and this is an idea I meant not to post because I'm not in the mood
to start a new thread, but I guess your willingness to debate has persuaded
me), Harry is not the miserable, suffering soul he's cracked up to be. True,
he's lost his parents, and his aunt and uncle are oppressive, but he's had
three years of adoptive parents in the Weasley's, he's got friends, he's got
star status in sports, he's important to the world (he knew that even before
hearing the prophecy), he's got money, he's got all his basic needs met, his
crush likes him even more than he likes her, he does reasonably well in
school. Compared to the real problems in this world, Harry's living a soft
life. He's not a third world kid starving in the gutter. He's not flunking
out of school and living on drugs on the streets. His *only* problem is that
a villian is out to kill him, and as we see in his thoughts in OoP, his
successes against Voldemort have boosted his self-esteem more than they have
traumatized him. So people won't tell him every secret; poor Harry. So DD
won't look at him; the Weasleys, Sirius and Lupin aren't enough for him?
Either the encounters with Voldemort have traumatized him in and of
themselves, in which case he should be a nutcase, or they haven't, in which
case he should be grateful for his decent life.

>
> 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).
>

I have already conceded this point. My problem with Ron was actually caused
by lack of page time.

>
> 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.

Yes, this was realistic as far as it went. I mentioned this in my complaint
about OoP being called a brilliant study in adolesence. It vignettes
adolescence quite well, but is not a *study*.


> 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.

I've written more about this in responses to other responses.

> 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.
>
Can't argue with a non-argument, but there is certainly room for debate
here.

> 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.

As I wrote elsewhere, I'd give PS a 9.5/10 in perfection for the kind of
book it tries to be. CoS gets mixed reviews, but still passes admirably. I'd
give PoA 8/10. There are many things about it that I like better than PS,
but there is very little that could improve PS and more that could improve
PoA. GoF gets a 5 from me for its gaping plot holes - the ones that the fans
have worked so hard to fill, but that JKR left open for the filling. Fan
effort gets points for the fans, not for the book. And OoP - sorry, but not
a diamond to me.

>
> 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.
>
CoS, though weak, irked fewer fans than OoP has. And I believe that all the
setups could have been done better in both cases and don't justify the poor
results. So I reject the apologetics, but your sticking to your story
doesn't irk in the least.

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

The Admiring Skeptic

P.S. I would be happy to continue this discussion with you, but I'm not
going to be checking the list for while, so please reply offlist, too.