Taking it seriously (Was:Question for Snape Bashers)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 101935

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wanda Sherratt" 
<wsherratt3338 at r...> wrote:


Dumbledore11214 at y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Well, this is in my opinion absolutely inrealistic aspect of 
> > children's reaction to Snape. Although, I guess Harry is supposed 
> to 
> > be a "hero", who should overcome everything life throws at him, 
> but 
> > again just look at Neville, whose biggest fear is professor Snape.
> > 


Wanda:
> My problem is, I can't take this even one-onehundredth as seriously 
> as other people do.  I just don't buy Harry Potter as a 20th 
century 
> Young Werther - a boy of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.  Where 
> other people are earnestly discussing his life with the Dursleys as 
> a case for Social Services intervention, I see it as a satirical 
> riot.  He lives in a closet!  Under the stairs!  With all the 
> spiders!  It's all so over-the-top, it's funny, like "Willy Wonka 
> and the Chocolate Factory" - all the grandparents bedridden for 20 
> years, sleeping in the same bed, and everyone living on cabbage 
> water.  It's a satire on sentimental, pathetic-waif stories 
> like "The Old Curiosity Shop", with poor, persecuted Little Nell.  
> It's great that Rowling can combine this with adventure and 
> suspense, but comedy is never very far away, and I think that 
comedy 
> is really what she does best. This is why I felt Book 5 was such a 
> failure; I suddenly found Rowling was expecting me to take all this 
> stuff seriously, and I just couldn't switch my view of Hogwarts 
from 
> St. Custard's to Lowood School.  Maybe this was always her 
intention-
>  to start us off with a lighthearted story and gradually turn it 
> into a searing drama, but if it is, I think she's misjudged her 
> abilities.  She really doesn't have what it takes to write a very 
> deep, serious book, whereas she can write humour and satire as well 
> as anyone and better than most.
> 
> Wanda


Alla:

Wanda, it is not your problem that you cannot take Harry's trials and 
tribulations seriously. It is your right. 

Nevertheless, I don't see it a satirical riot only. Yes, the book 
started as fairy tale. Yes, many, many scenes are hysterically funny 
and to many scenes we can have both serious and humorous reactions, 
BUT after OoP I expect Rowling to deal with the abuse aspect more 
seriously. I don't think that OoP was a failure , on the contrary.
Actually, Rowling convinced me to take  alot of what she writes 
seriously after PoA, after graveyeard scene, etc.


Why our reaction should be limited to one emotion only? Harry's life 
at Dursleys could be both funny and sad, right?


Anyway, what I am trying to say is that it is absolutely, perfectly 
reasonable for you to read the book as satire and for me as if it is 
not.

What I object to is when someone tells me not to take it too 
seriously. (Wanda, I know you have not done it in your post). I 
remember having similar conversation with a poster (Sorry, don't 
remember who it was, so I apologise in advance), who told me 
something to the effect that whatever Snape does to the children is 
funny. Yes, Snape's remark to Hermione for example was funny and I 
laughed, but at the same time it was one of my most strongest "want 
to slap Snape several times" moments in the book.


Alla