Stereotyping

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 84902

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" <hpfanmatt at g...> wrote:


<<<< Matt: >>>

<<<<< I agree with Steve(#84678) that a story -- like any other work
-- should be valued for the factors that make it great, and cannot be
expected to accomplish an infinite set of social agendas.

On the other hand, I disagree with the suggestion in Steve's post, and
to some extent yours, that it is ok for a bestselling author simply to
ignore the fact that her book is being read by millions upon millions
of children. That, to me, is like the famous athlete (and there have
been many) who says "I am not a role model." Those athletes are (were)
role models, like it or not. They can choose to be bad role models or
good ones, but they cannot escape responsibility for their actions. I
believe that Rowling is very conscious of the level of influence she
wields. In some areas she has chosen not to preach; in others
(personal responsibility, for instance) her books send a very clear
message.>>>>>


bboy_mn:

Well, it's nice that we agree to some extent.

But I must reiterate that the author does indeed NOT have an
obligation to those millions of children reading the story. If the
natural course of the story, of her artistic vision, is to drift in
the direction of the most extreme SLASH fan fiction, then so be it. If
that happens and the books are no longer appropriate for children,
then they are free to choose to stop reading the books.

Now realistically, my sick little scenerio is never going to happen,
but the point remains that she must and will stay true to her artistic
vision, and the reader can take it or leave it. Once she starts to
modify the story to 'please' potential readers, once the reader
becomes more important than the story, then the books sinks in the
direction of tired old TV sit-coms; shallow, trite, and devoid of any
true merit. 

I think that one of the reason the books are so refreshing and
popular, is that JKR is dedicated to the story without regard to the
readers. She is telling the story to herself, just the way she thinks
the story should go, and if we want to join her on this adventure,
fine, and if we choose not to, also fine; she will continue on with
the journey without us. 

As far as the moral quality and role model aspect of these book, let
me point out that every major religion has endorsed these books as
having a strong moral message, and therefore, serve as an excellent
moral guide and source of role models.

However, we need to stop at this point and take note of the means by
which JKR incorporates her moral lessons. She does it with moral
ambiguity, and that is, to some extent, a conscious effort on her
part. She doesn't want a book of characters drawn in black and white;
she paints them in shades of grey. 

We have had long discussions, where sides of the discussion are
polarized between 'Harry is a saint' and 'Harry is the worst little
brat to ever hit the printed page', and this all stems from that moral
ambiguity. 

Harry disobeys the rules, and does so frequently to his detriment and
to the detriment of others. However, in most cases, when he breaks the
rules or goes against clear and specific orders, he does so
selflessly, and acts for the greater good without regard to his own
personal gain or safety. 

How can a boy, who disobeys and breaks rules be the hero? How can he
be a role model for the reader? He is, because when you look at the
bigger picture, you see that Harry is a good and decent person, who
always puts the value of other over himself. Many times when he breaks
rules, it's because the rules are corrupt, as we see in the latest
book. Other times, circumstances simply demand that there are
exceptions to the rules. Rules aren't absolute, they can't cover every
concievable circumstance and situation. 

So, sometimes, you have to write the rules as you go. Sometimes that
which is good and right takes precedence over the codefied opinions of
committees. A perfect example; a soldier during wartime is bound by
law to unquestioningly obey orders or suffer the legal consequences.
Yet when those orders demand that he commit 'Crimes Against Humanity',
he has a moral and legal obligation to disobey, or suffer prosecution
for war crimes.

This moral ambiguity is far more powerful method of teaching morality,
than any blatant in-your-face preachy moralizing pontificated lessons.
In fact, the more obvious in-your-face lesson are most often
discounted or ingnored.

Moral ambiguity, however, demands that you look deep inside yourself
and ask you own conscience if Harry is good or bad, if Sirius is good
or bad, and frequenly, we find that the answer is YES, Harry is good,
and yes, Harry is bad. Just like real life, the answers are not cut
and dried; they are not black and white. So, in the reader's
subconscious struggle to resolve the moral ambigity, they managed to
stumble upon a great truth. 

Truly, in life, the lessons we teach ourselves are the lessons we
learn the best. To be told this is right and that is wrong, will never
carry the same immense moral weight as *realizing* that this is right
and that is wrong. 

The point; so far, even though JKR has given no consideration to
anyone's agenda other than her own, she has managed to tell a story
that is far more morally powerful than any other book I have ever read.



<<<< Matt continues: >>>

<<<<< Not "prejudices"; preferences. When folks say, for instance, "I
wish there were more strong female characters", they are not saying
"JKR's characters do not fit my image of what women are like"; they
are instead saying "there is a particular type of female character I
would like to see portrayed." You can agree or disagree about their
choice of words (i.e., what makes a "strong female character"). You
can agree or disagree about whether the characters in the book really
lack the characteristics others want to see portrayed more
prominently. You can agree or disagree about whether Rowling made good
choices in the characters she chose to portray. But you cannot really
deny that Rowling made the choices she made, nor that those choices
have an impact on the reader (and, in most cases, different impacts on
different readers).>>>>>


bboy_mn:

When you say, "I wish there were more strong female characters" and
"there is a particular type of female character I would like to see
portrayed", you are stating an opinion, and as I said, opinions are
like noses, everybody gets one. 

So, I can't say your opinion is wrong, that certainly wouldn't and
shouldn't be allowed, but I can reasonably say I have a different
opinion. And, at some point, once we have stated and restated these
opinions, each to persuade the other, and no ground is gained, we
simply have to agree to disagree. 

As far as yours and the wishes of others for more developed female
characters, I can only say that the story isn't over yet, and I feel
very confident that before it is done, you will get your wish. 

But in saying this, I must restate my opinion that this can only be
done in the course of the natural flow of the story. If the natural
flow and progress of the story demand that female characters aren't
fleshed out until near the end of the book (or not at all), then I
think we have to accept that. That doesn't stop us from wishing or
wanting it to flow differently, but we have to accept that the author
has to let the story unfold as she see it in her artistic vision. To
write the books with an attempt to pacify certain aspects of the
readership, in my opinion, would be the doom of the series.

So, in conclusion, I whole heartedly support your (and others) desire
for stronger female role models; that would be nice, but not if it
compromises the integrity of the story.

Just a long winded, often repeated thought.

bboy_mn