JKR characterizations--oversimplification?

[elfundeb2]

No: HPFGUIDX 115042


Lisa wrote:

> I *know* 
> Sirius is flawed.  I accept that.  I think most/all of the 
> characters in these books are flawed, and that is a good thing.  I 
> accept that JKR thinks he's flawed as well.  But several of her 
> comments really bugged me, in that she actually puts forth 
> interpretations that I found frustratingly simplistic when I saw 
> *readers* spouting them. 

[snip]
> 
> On the issue of characterization
if Sirius has not been developed 
as 
> a character, and there is a problem with the cohesion of the 
story, 
> would JKR's statements about any character really correct those 
> issues?  That sounds to me more like a critique of the writing 
style, 
> rather than a discussion of how she views the character. 


And Neri wrote on a completely different thread:
 
> I liked your log, sophirom. It is takes considerably more effort 
to 
> actually read JKR, especially in a methodical way, than sprout 
fandom 
> opinions and theories. I hope you'll also get to CoS and the other 
> books, because as you mention yourself Snape's characterization in 
> SS/PS is problematic. JKR uses him there as the red herring 
villain, 
> so she must make him look very suspicious. This is why I don't 
give 
> much weight to sentences like "cold and empty eyes that made you 
> think of dark tunnels" in SS/PS. However, it will be interesting 
if 
> such characterization appears again in CoS and PoA because in 
these 
> books Snape is not a suspect.
> 
I'm combining comments to both because my thoughts converge.  Neri 
asserts that Snape's character is problematic in PS/SS because he is 
serving a dual purpose.  In addition to introducing and developing 
Snape's character, Snape must act in a certain way to sidetrack 
readers on a major plot point.

I think those same problems reappear tenfold in POA with respect to 
Sirius (perhaps explaining why the Snape vs. Sirius wars erupt 
periodically) and hamper readers' understanding of his character.  
In order to serve the needs of the plot she had to make Sirius act 
in ways that appear very inconsistent with the loving godfather that 
suddenly appears in the Shrieking Shack and continues (along with 
the sage counsellor) in GoF.  The result of this dichotomy is that 
many readers either discredit the irrational behavior or excuse it 
because of his 12 years in Azkaban, or they distrust Sirius 
altogether.  If I were asked for one word to describe his character, 
I would waver between *complex* and *inconsistent*.  I'm not 
entirely convinced of his believability.

I believe that this is one of the weaknesses in the books:  where 
she needs characters for plot reasons, it often requires them to do 
things that take away from their characterization.  In CoS and GoF, 
where she used magical means to create characters that weren't as 
they seemed, this seemed to be less of a problem.  And this weakness 
is one of the things that leads to readers asking whether the author 
*likes* a character - to which the proper response is "yes" (or 
perhaps "yes, despite his faults (or perhaps because of them)") 
or "no", and to the author feeling compelled to *explain*, which can 
lead to all kinds of mischief.  

Jen Reese wrote:

I completely believed, 
> because of the way JKR wrote the story, that we were intended to 
see 
> Sirius' hatred of Kreacher as a very personal hatred stemming from 
> his bizarre family, their love of the Dark Arts and even Grimmauld 
> Place. It never occured to me in reading OOTP that Sirius was 
> treating Kreacher the way he did *because* he was a House Elf and 
> Sirius looked down on him for it. From what we knew up to that 
> point, Sirius had befriended a werewolf, his best friend married a 
> person considered by some to be inferior because of her heritage, 
> and Sirius was a long-time member of the Order, whose philosophy 
is 
> inclusive rather than exclusive. None of those instances prepared 
me 
> to believe he was classist or prejudiced.

Dumbledore told Harry at the end of OOP that Sirius *did* loathe 
Kreacher because he represented the family he so utterly rejected, 
but Dumbledore also told Harry that Sirius "regarded [Kreacher] as a 
servant unworthy of much interest or notice."  However, this 
exchange did not occur until after Sirius was dead.  JKR did not 
really show this through Sirius' actions or statements.

I think the key is that Kreacher was a servant, not that he was a 
house-elf; however, I agree that JKR did not develop this point by 
showing us Sirius attitude toward servants.  His statement in GoF 
turns out to be misleading but the only clue we have that the 
statement is unreliable is the fact that he held a grudge against 
Crouch Sr. Even knowing that Sirius did not feel obliged to treat 
beings that he loathed with the human dignity they deserved (which I 
think is adequately shown through JKR's treatment of Snape and 
Kreacher combined; there are hints of Sirius as bully well before 
OOP) does not lead to the conclusion that Sirius thought house elves 
unworthy of notice.

Lissa:
> 
> Bear in mind that this is her website and a FAQ.  She wrote maybe 
two paragraphs about Sirius there, after proofreading 20 chapters in 
a sitting.  She made two other mistakes in what she wanted to say in 
the same update.  Methinks JKR isn't writing long essays on 
characterization for this FAQ!
> 
> I don't think Sirius as he is in the books boils down to such a 
simple character.  I think she did that for the FAQ to answer the 
question "do you like Sirius Black?"  Given how the world is howling 
for book 6, I doubt she's spending tons of time writing her answers 
for this... I'm assuming she's writing the book instead.  
> 

I agree that JKR puts little time into her answers, leading me to 
the conclusion is that the website has so little credibility that 
it's barely worth reading.  Just considering the number of answers 
she's had to change, why should we credit anything she says there?  
Would it not be better for JKR to put her energies into getting it 
right in the books?  (Yes, this is a longwinded way of saying that 
the website is not reliable enough to be considered to be canon, 
because she can't be trusted to remember the details in her books.)

I am particularly offended that JKR felt compelled to *explain* 
Sirius' character to the readers.  Having told fans that Sirius 
was "dead sexy" once, I didn't think that this was a question that 
needed answering.  Also, I believe that an author should allow the 
work to speak for itself.  Sirius' character should be based on what 
JKR has written between the covers of the books.  It's the 
responsibility of a good writer to use the text to develop  a 
character.  Using a website to convey characterization information 
suggests that perhaps she did not adequately convey what she 
intended.  

Or, perhaps, she just forgot what she wrote.  What she really needs 
is a fan review board, composed entirely of L.O.O.N.s.  ;-)

Jen: 

Now that's a possibility. Another thing I'd like to keep 
> believing is JKR is *not* influenced by fan reaction and 
statements. 
> Unfortunately, now I'm wondering if that's naive. She obviously 
> knows many of the fansites and visits them periodically. Reading 
> certain ideas may influence her to change her mind--she's only 
human 
> after all.

I hope she won't change her mind, but the cumbersome inclusion of 
answers to fan questions in OOP (like why Hermione wasn't sorted 
into Ravenclaw) leaves me a bit nervous, too.

I think there's something of the same issue in her comments on 
bullying.  SS Susan said:
>that I think how she
> answerws a RL, child of today on the topic of bullying is not at 
all
> the same as Author Rowling might answer the question at Hogwarts.

I hope so, because the message JKR sends in the books about bullying 
is mixed at best, and not solely because Harry will not seek help.  
I think a strong case can be made that the books condone bullying 
*if* the victim's own actions are reprehensible enough.  For example 
(from OOP ch. 29):

"[Harry] had been so sure his parents were wonderful people . . . . 
Hadn't people like Hagrid and Sirius *told* Harry how wonderful his 
parents had been?  (Yeah, well, look what Sirius was like himself, 
said a nagging voice inside Harry's head . . . he was as bad, wasn't 
he?)  McGonagall . . . had described them as forerunners of the 
Weasley twins, and Harry could not imagine Fred or George hanging 
someone upside down for the fun of it . . . not unless they really 
loathed them . . . perhaps Malfoy, or somebody who really deserved 
it."

Was anyone else bothered when they smashed Montague's head into a 
Vanishing Cabinet and locked him away just because he tried to dock 
them points?  JKR plays bullying for laughs, and despite what she 
says on the website, the books are written from Harry's POV and 
Harry clearly approves of retaliatory bullying.  I just don't see 
how she thinks she can undo this with a little comment on a corner 
of the website.

Debbie
apologizing for ranting, but I feel JKR has handled the canon 
responses on the website very badly