In defense of Molly /Molly's treatment of Arthur

[phoenixgod2000]

No: HPFGUIDX 136644

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Rebecca Hoskins" 
<elbarad at a...> wrote:

> 
> Harry's father, was brave, clever and talented. He was also a
> show-off who bullied Snape, who he disliked because he was
>  into the dark arts. Sure, bullying behaviour is nasty, and 
> James grew out of it (although Snape didn't!). I don't see 
> that JKR wrote James as a bully to belittle the father figure,
>  but to make it less easy for Harry to hero-worship his father.
>  Harry might have longed for his mother in her absence,
> but it was James that he elevated to hero-status. Harry had
>  to come to realise, during OotP that James wasn't perfect,
>  but that he was still, after everything, a good person.

Why was it necessary to deconstruct his father the hero? What 
possible good does it do for the story?  So far it hasn't proven to 
be much of a major plot point other than to crush Harry.  And if it 
was done to make him more of a 3-D figure then why hasn't the same 
been done for Lily. Why has Lily been kept pristine and lovely while 
James was torn down? And not just in the book. In the Mugglenet 
interview, she specifically mentions that she considers James's 
actions less brave than Lily's.  Why was it necessary to qualify 
James's actions, what purpose does it serve except to say lessen him 
alongside his wife? Why couldn't they have been equally brave in 
different ways? Would that have changed the story? It is basically 
the only moment in the series where James gets to be great and she 
had to go and tear it down.  While at the same time, perfect sainted 
Lily gets to remain perfect and sainted. 

It's disgusting in my view.

> I have heard people suggest that JKR did not make any strong 
> father figures for her young charges at Hogwart (James 
> bullying, Arthur a drip (which I disagree with anyway), Tobias
>  Snape an abusive man, Mr Lovegood a loony etc), but I see 
> Arthur as a strong father, Mr longbottom as a very heroic 
> figure, Amos Diggory as a likable (if over-proud) father, 
> Hagrid's dad as a funny and loveable father. I can 
> continue if necassary; many strong and likeable fathers!

Most of those are brief sketches of fathers. They aren't strong 
because almost none of them have promient roles. And of the ones 
that do, Arthur is drip (which I do think), Vernon is an ass, James 
is a bully, and Sirius was basically insane (still loveable though).
 
> JKR has made all her characters very colourful, and very real. 
> And just like real people they all have their negative 
> aspects, men and women alike. Although JKR may have had 
> reason to feel negatively about some men, I do not feel 
> that she has let this intrude into her novels, and neither 
> do I feel that children reading these books will take home 
> negative views of either men or women.

This is where we disagree. I don't know her so I can't speak to what 
she thinks, but if she does have issues with men, of course it'll 
intrude in her written work. Everyone's thoughts intrude on their 
work. The experience that anyone has fills their work. It would be 
impossible to exorcise.  Writing is about putting your feelings on 
paper. Who you like, who you hate, what you think is good, what you 
think is evil, all those things inform what a person puts on paper, 
regardless of the story your telling.
 
> When you compare JKR's portrayal of men, to C. S. Lewis'
>  protrayal of women, there is clearly no comparison! I 
> adored Lewis's books when I was a child, but as an adult
>  reading them to my three children I'm afraid that the 
> sexual stereotypes in his stories were uncomfortably
> obvious; to the point where I stopped reading them to my 
> 8yr old son. 

Not a big fan of CS Lewis except for the Lion, the witch and the 
wardrobe and The Screwtape letters (best philosophy book ever), so I 
can't really say. I barely remember the plot to the chronicles of 
Narnia.

>By comparison, JKR's work is almost entirely
>  free of bigotry of any nature, and children reading her
>  books are only going to become more open-minded due to 
> reading them, not less.

I would disagree, but to each their own.

phoenixgod2000, for whom gender issues are a pet peeve. You should 
see me rant on anti-male bias in education :)