[HPforGrownups] Stereotyping

[Janet Anderson]

No: HPFGUIDX 84624

B Arrowsmith <arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com> said:

>Stereotyping.
>
>By the posters.
>
>This post may not see the light of day - it all depends if I can keep
>it within the bounds of civility demanded by the Admin Elves; certainly
>I expect a lot of fans to disagree with it, that's not a problem. But I
>   would be  worried if no-one agreed with me.

Well, don't worry. I've been thinking for at least a week about writing a 
similar post.  The "let's all hang Molly from the lamppost because she's not 
a CEO" thread was especially starting to get up my nose.

The thing is, the Harry Potter series is a deservedly well-loved and popular 
work, and lots of people -- it seems to me -- would like to see JKR use that 
popularity to push some agenda or other which they think is important.  Now, 
since JKR is the writer, if *she* wants to push an agenda in her own books, 
it's her right.  If she chooses either to put forward an agenda which 
differs from the reader's, or (as she has done in my opinion) to ignore 
politics altogether except insofar as it is used to tell a good story, that 
is also her right.

I, personally, think she's done an excellent job of keeping to the point and 
not allowing irrelevant or distracting issues to affect her.  Religions of 
all kinds have tried to claim the books as their own, but in fact she has 
simply avoided the entire issue -- which I appreciate.  The issue of 
"slavery" and house-elves, I think, was especially well dealt with -- on the 
one hand, it's clearly shown as a bad thing and a source of abuse, but on 
the other hand we have JKR making fun of people like Hermione and SPEW, 
idealists who go off the deep end without doing any research or asking the 
people whose lives they are attempting to legislate what *they* think.

The theory that because Molly does not have a salaried job she is not a 
"strong character" reminds me of something that was pointed out in the early 
and strident days of feminism -- that the people who denigrate women who 
keep houses and raise children are insulting their own mothers and 
grandmothers.  And there were (and still are) a whole lot of strong 
characters, sharp intellects, and accomplished individuals among them.  
Where do you think the Weasley children inherited all those brains (several 
Head Boys) and picked up the ethics that they display?  At least half of 
these qualities had to come from Molly.  Furthermore, as some perceptive 
soul has pointed out, if it weren't for Molly, the Weasleys and the OoP 
would all starve to death ...

And can someone please explain to me why some people think there should be 
more on-screen sex in these books?  Bad writers put sex into a book to help 
it sell; JKR isn't a bad writer and her books are selling just fine. :)  You 
can get that stuff anywhere, but you can only get Harry Potter in a Harry 
Potter book.

In short, I think that trying to use these books as support for, or as a 
springboard for, one's own political or social views is inappropriate.  
Taken far enough, it may even interfere with enjoyment.  (My husband is 
anti-boarding school and that's the first thing he focussed on in the books, 
and he still can't get past that.  And let's not even discuss his reaction 
to the house-elves.)

Hoping also that I have remained within the bounds of civility,


Janet Anderson

_________________________________________________________________
Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account is over 
limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es