The 'Other' in the HP books (was: Harry's Sexual Preference SHIP) - LONG

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 80851

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "msbeadsley" <msbeadsley at y...>
wrote:
> 
> How timely, considering--I am going to detour OT here, but relevant 
> nonetheless, and I will bring it back:
> 
> Yesterday, I attempted (ineptly, as it turned out) to participate in 
> the weekly "chat" (my first ever) and found myself in a (what I 
> thought was the main) HP chatroom with one other person. After what 
> appeared to be a glitch, the other poster commented, "Gay computer."  
> I inquired (with suspicion but without heat) what that meant and was 
> told "Where I'm from it means "off."  You know, stupid.  Like my 
> computer was acting." I inquired, "Well, what if I'm gay and object 
> to your usage?"
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> Sandy aka "msbeadsley" 

bboy_mn:

For a 13 year old Southern Baptist, I think this person showed
admirable restraint, and so did you. I would expect a 13 year old to
launch into an overly impulsive rant earmarked by emotional excess.
Since both of you played it cool, I'm impressed.

As far as the comment, I'm assuming that this was a regional
variation, and that this kid was attempting, whether intentional or
not, a silly 13 year olds twisted attempt at some reflection of adult
political correctness. Perhaps a 13 year old silly way of mock-PC. 

This implication is that your computer was acting a little queer
(odd), the politically correct and more polite way of saying 'queer'
is 'gay', so your computer was acting gay. That still doesn't add the
most benevolent spin to the word, but I think the kid saw his/her
comment as far more innocent than you did.

As far as the HP series, I think it already serves as a metaphor to
inspire gay kids with out actually having to have a gay kid in the
story. I think the moral lesson in most fairtales and in many other
good stories are not in-your-face moral lessons. They are much more
subtle and symbolic. So, again, my point is that the HP story already
serves as an excellent world in which gay kids can explore themselves.

As far as an actual gay character appearing in the story, I don't
think so. Just like I don't think sex in any form will appear in the
stories. I mean, Harry got his first kiss, and really, we didn't get
to see it. It was extremely subtly implied, and then spoken about
afterwards. If a kiss is so downplayed, then there is no way we will
see any overt sexuality; gay or straight. But I think relationships
and intimacy, and all the things associated with those, will appear.
So, it a gay character does appear, his/her 'gayness' will be VERY
subtly played out; barely noticable to all but the most observant.

So the short version is, I think the books already serve as a metaphor
that allows gay kids to explore themselves and find their strength; so
 the book doesn't really need a gay kid.

Much of JKR's story ethics are subtly and ambiguously reflected. For
example, Harry Potter is no Greg Brady (The Brady Bunch). He is far
more flawed, and commits far greater transgressions than any old-time
TV sit-com kid ever did. Plus, there are very very few of the
moralizing sermons that Beaver Cleaver's father used to give him. 

Personally, I think JKR's method teaches much greater and deeper moral
lessons than any amount of sermonizing or moralizing. Kids aren't
stupid. They see the Harry does things that are wrong, but Harry
doesn't blow those actions off. When Harry lies in the book; the book
calls it a lie, even though it obvious enough that the book could get
away with not saying it explicitly.  Harry also avoids looking people
in the eye when he lies. These are all subtle signs to the reader that
Harry understands that what he is doing is wrong, and that he feels
some sense of guilt about it.

But overal, when it really counts, we see Harry demonstrating superb
moral character, and very positive moral attributes. So rather than
teach kids by sermonizing, Harry teaches kids by example. The message
is that no one is perfect, but even given that imperfection, you are
still expected to be a good person, and more importantly, when it
really really counts, you are expected to do the right thing. Those
metaphoric lessons will cause kids to truly take these lessons to heart.

The moral ambiguity or uncertainty in these books will lead kids to
look inside themselves for their own sense of what is truly right and
wrong. I trust that when left alone under those circumstances, kids
will not have any trouble coming to the right conclusions.

The lessons you learn best are the ones you teach yourself.

Just a thought.

bboy_mn