Theoretical boundaries

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 120408


My, my, this has certainly turned interesting!  

I must be one of those weird people whom others would probably label 
a "fence-sitter" or "wishy-washy," because I've never felt compelled 
to make a choice between the two "camps" being put forth here as 
choices for HPfGU.  I don't find different styles distressing.  Do I 
ever roll my eyes at a post?  Sure.  Do others roll their eyes at 
mine?  Sure.  Who cares!  I still enjoy far more threads here than I 
don't enjoy.  

Some people are analytical by nature, some are not.  Some are 
interested in lit crit, others in social crit.  Some respond either 
emotionally or *to* the emotional situations presented in the books, 
while others are more detached.  This is not surprising!  Many 
people are drawn to the sciences or the social sciences or the 
humanities.  Some of us are drawn to the liberal arts because we 
can't decide which subjects or styles we like best and rather enjoy 
a mishmash.  This is me for sure.  

I find myself nodding along with Lupinlore fairly frequently.  But 
you know what?  I nod along with Kneasy or Carolyn too sometimes.  I 
nod along with Nora many times, with Alla or Potioncat sometimes, 
with Jen almost always.   So what?  If there are others who find 
that they DON'T nod along with a poster or a style or a type of 
thread, just delete/ignore.

Now, for me, I find Kneasy's comment that he could never transfer 
real grief or emotion to fictional characters fascinating.  That 
statement provides an insight which helps make additional sense of 
some of his musings and positions.  Yet I also find it interesting 
when a poster identifies emotionally with a bully or the bullied.  
Personally, I do tend to identify with characters -- with *multiple* 
characters! -- so I enjoy discussions of Sirius' character flaws & 
strengths, of Tom's & Harry's similar upbringings, of free will & 
choice as they pertain to Harry & DD's role in his life, of what 
it's like for Ron et al. to be poor.  I also enjoy the theorizing 
about the whys and wherefores:  What's up with Lucius – is he loyal 
to Voldy or power hungry himself?  Is there something going on in 
Vernon or Petunia's background which would explain much of their 
behavior?  Why *did* Snape come back?  All that is fun to me.

Where we get into trouble, imo, is when someone issues a blanket 
value judgment over another "camp."  I *do* understand that 
approaching things primarily from one style or another, rather than 
from someplace in the middle, can be frustrating.  You're trying to 
make a point and the other person keeps coming back with Value 
Judgment A or Analysis B.  They're not *hearing* each other or 
seeing through the same lens.  I acknowledge that can be 
frustrating.  

But you know what?  Then maybe try once more, then bow out of the 
discussion.  What I object to is those who either expect 
or "require" all others to SEE it their way or DO it their way.   Or 
when a poster is openly condescending towards another or arrogant 
about his/her position being right [whether that's a *single* 
position on a *single event/character or about his/her overall way 
of analyzing things]. 

There's room here for the variety we offer.  Or so I think.

Siriusly Snapey Susan