Innocent Alby?

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 123004


<SNIP> 
> SSSusan:
> A thought-provoking post, Renee.  I believe you have put your 
finger 
> on something many do struggle with in the series.  HAVE we moved 
away 
> from a fairytale and into the realm of more "realistic fiction" 
> [yikes, is that an oxymoron? sorry, lit majors]?  It would seem so 
> with the ways the Dursleys appear to have moved from caricature to 
> true nasties, with Harry's raging in OotP, with the death of 
Sirius.  
> But, you're right, Renee.  If we've made that shift, what do we do 
> with characters who still seem to be sort of caricatures or 
symbolic, 
> rather than real?  
> 
> I'd never thought of DD in this way, but I think you're right.  We 
> saw his "breakdown" moment at the end of OotP, when we confessed to 
> old man failings.  And, since JKR called him the epitome of 
goodness, 
> we assume we're supposed to feel bad for him, forgive him, and move 
> on, still trusting & believing in him.  Clearly, not all readers 
are 
> interested in doing that and prefer to analyze him a bit more 
harshly 
> in the light of the RW.  
> 
> And your bringing up Sirius' death is a good one, too.  I'm one of 
> the ones who's argued that JKR should *not* bring Sirius back b/c I 
> believe it would undermine the message that she seems to be trying 
to 
> make -- that death is painful, final, and sometimes very, very 
> senseless.  That's Real Life.  But is THIS?  If I'm understanding 
you 
> correctly, you're saying that sometimes you feel like she wants to 
> have it both ways.  Allow the fairytale, symbolic, don't-try-to-
> analyze-this-as-real-life view of things, but then also have us see 
> it all as realistic.  Have we shifted to "realistic" or is it a 
> mishmash of realistic and fairytale?
> 
> I don't know.  I've not had my coffee yet.  Perhaps I'm babbling, 
but 
> I did want to thank you for raising the issue.
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan

I think you have put the issue rather well, Susan.  JKR very often 
DOES seem to want it both ways.  On some issues, such as the death of 
Sirius, the attitudes of the Wizarding World toward Harry's story, 
etc., she seems to want to wave the banner of "realism."  On others, 
the Dursleys, DD, Snape, etc., we are supposed, it seems, to 
say "Well, it's a fantasy story and therefore by definition these 
characters/situations/reactions are very far from realism."

The problem that I and I think a lot of others have is that you just 
CAN'T have it both ways.  If Sirius' death is meant to be realistic 
and we are invited to use "realistic" approaches to it, then why 
should we spare Dumbledore's actions the same scrutiny?  If Dolores 
Umbridge is supposed to represent a "real" child abuser, as I sense 
she is, then why are the Dursleys not to be examined in this light?  
I think the answer, unfortunately, seems to be "because it would make 
JKR uncomfortable if we did that."  She seems to have constructed her 
narrative in such a way that for it to work you have to accept some 
elements as realistic while allowing her to "fence-off" certain 
other, often somewhat similar elements, as "just fantasy not to be 
taken as real."  

Let me use an example that doesn't get used very often: the polices 
of Fudge and DD toward Harry.  We are obviously meant to see them 
very differently.  JKR manipulates their appearance and manner in 
such a way as to engender automatic like and trust for DD and the 
opposite for Fudge.  Yet, what do they do?  They fear that Harry will 
prove to be the destruction of the wizarding world (for very 
different reasons and in very different ways, granted), and subject 
him to abuse to prevent that.

Now, I grant you that in no way are the two sets of decisions 
completely equivalent.  DD is trying to prevent Harry's death by 
leaving him at Privet Drive, whereas Fudge is just trying to shut the 
boy up by dispatching Umbridge.

And yet.  It seems clear that we are to view Fudge as a "realistic" 
government official blinded by petty interests and the confusion of 
his own well-being with the public good.  "Realism" is invited 
enthusiastically, and his decisions are supposed to be seen as part 
of Harry entering the "real world."

DD, however, we are invited to see in almost purely symbolic terms.  
We are mostly (with some notable exceptions, I admit) NOT invited to 
see Harry's life at Privet Drive in "realistic" terms nor are we 
to "realistically" examine what DDs motivations for his policies 
toward the Dursleys have been.  

Once again, I do not say the actions of Fudge and Albus are 
equivalent even on the face of it.  I do say, however, that JKR is 
clearly more comfortable presenting Fudge as a relatively realistic 
character - a politician blinded by greed and fear, and also with 
some good common-sense objections on his side as his speech to the 
Wizengamot makes clear.  On the other hand, she is(generally) NOT 
comfortable providing a similar "realistic" view of Dumbledore, of 
how much of his '81 decisions were motivated by fear and cold 
calculation versus his concern for Harry, or what the implications of 
the Dursleys' actions and DD's failure to intervene really are, and 
of how that raises some very valid questions as to whether DD has 
gone too far in using methods and cold calculation similar to that 
employed by his enemy.  She seems to prefer the "epitome of goodness" 
explanation, which basically means "Albus is the good guy and as for 
all the rest of this stuff, this is a fantasy and not to be taken 
realistically."

A lot of us find this amounts to authorial defensiveness and 
attempted slight-of-hand.  As Renee said, it seems to be:  I, the 
author, can do whatever I want and I want to be seen as portraying 
certain things realistically.  However, if realistic questions make 
me uncomfortable or undermine the way I want certain 
characters/decisions/events to be seen, then I reserve the right to 
hop over the fence and say, "It's only fantasy!."

Now, the above paragraph isn't fair to JKR, she is a lot more 
talented and generally a much better writer than that.  But there are 
times in the narrative when she definitely seems to slouch in that 
direction.


Lupinlore