JKR's Characterization

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 114993


Eloise: 
> They play Tough sport which as Del pointed out is much more 
> dangerous than anything a British schoolchild would play in RL, 
> where some schools have given up rugby because of the risk of 
> injury, local authorities are cutting back conker trees and 
> playing conkers banned.

SSSusan:
Please, what are conker trees and playing conkers??


Eloise: 
> With Snape, dare I utter the name, we are presented with a modern 
> psychological view of an arguably abusive (certainly damaged) 
> character emerging from what is hinted is an abusive or damaging 
> background. So far so good. Where we have a problem is with him 
> being let loose in a 20th century classroom, apparently with the 
> headmaster's full knowledge of what he is like. You can argue that
> Snape is or isn't abusive, but in the fictional world he inhabits, 
> his behaviour seems to be tolerated. 
<snip>
> If Dumbledore is the embodiment of goodness in the narrative, his 
> attitude is still consonant with the Tough attitudes of the WW, 
> where children are not cosseted and protected from the nastiness of 
> the life as many feel they should be in the real world. It seems to 
> me that the text on its own can tell us nothing of JKR's own 
> attitudes  to abuse as to an extent she is like an anthropologist 
> reporting and describing the practices of another world in which 
> things happen differently. 
<snip of interview segments>
> While the interview material shows us definitely that JKR sees 
> Snape as one who abuses his power, *within* the WW, there is a 
> morality which seems to say it's OK for children to be exposed to 
> this, to learn to deal with it. Within the confines of that 
> imagined world, characters regard Snape as a nasty git, but don`t 
> seem to think his behaviour merits particular censure. 


SSSusan:
It's rather remarkable that variations of the same topic are running 
in three threads simultaneously just now.  What you're arguing is the 
same thing I've been arguing (alas, less eloquently) in two other 
threads:  #114967, BULLYING (was: spoilers), which arose out of a 
discussion of JKR's update of her website FAQ, and #114970, Snape--
Abusive?  

JKR answered a question about bullying in her "Other Stuff" section, 
rather than in her "About the Books" section, and I think you're 
pointing to precisely *why* with this post.  Bullying in the RW & 
JKR's attitude toward it is not much like her treatment of bullying 
in the WW.  Similarly, how we react to Snape and his interactions 
with Harry tends to depend in part upon how much consideration is 
given to this alternate world JKR has created vs. the here & now of 
RW.  


Eloise: 
> That doesn't meant that there is no social commentary going on,
> that it is irrelevant or wrong to discuss the social issues that 
> arise from the books; I'm sure that JKR wants her readers to think
> about RL parallels, particularly the abuse of power, prejudice and 
> exploitation of the weak which seem to be constant themes, but we 
> see these themes through a glass, darkly, as the fictional world 
> which is their vehicle is so different from ours and the writing 
> permeated by influences from so many genres. 


SSSusan:
I agree totally.  It gets *difficult* sometimes to discuss the social 
issues precisely because when one person comments based on what's 
seen in canon, another may react through the different lens of the 
RW.  When aerson talks about abuse/not abuse in the WW, for instance, 
it can raise someone's hackles if it appears the post is claiming 
abuse is "okay," when in fact what I think is going on is simply one 
person writing about life in the very different WW of Hogwarts and 
the other responding with RL abuse in mind.

Siriusly Snapey Susan