Transcendant Wisdom? (was Re: Snape and Teaching, Does it Matter?)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 128450

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" <tonks_op at y...> wrote:
<SNIP>
> 
> 
> Tonks:
> I agree with both Neri and Betsy and would like to add to what 
they 
> have said.  JKR would naturally write was she knows most about as 
> every writer is advised to do.  But I think that there is more to 
it 
> than that.  The whole series is a teaching.  

Oh dear. IMO, and it is of course just my opinion, that is exalting 
the series well beyond what it deserves.  It also flies directly in 
the face of JKR's own statement that she really has no 
particular "moral lesson" or "great theme" in mind.  The series is 
interesting, yes.  Enjoyable most of the time.  Well written most of 
the time.  Possessed of some egregious flaws.  And most certainly, 
IMO, NOT a place to look for transcendent wisdom - despite 
Dumbledore's habit of making vacuous statements and acting in 
puzzling (and often very questionable) ways.


And by presenting it in 
> the format of a school and students, we the readers get into the 
> student mode.  We on a subconscious level are prepped to learn 
what 
> one of the greatest teachers of them all is teaching us.

One of the GREATEST TEACHERS OF THEM ALL?  Err, ah, uhm, yeah, 
ahem.  Sorry, but IMO that is also elevating JKR to a position well 
beyond what she deserves.  A very good writer she most certainly is, 
most of the time anyway.  But Shakespeare has nothing to worry 
about, and she wouldn't have cut any great shakes on the Committee 
of Translators that translated the King James Version of the Bible.  
Much less is she in the company of the people who actually wrote the 
contents of the Bible, or the Talmud, or the Koran, or the 
Upanishads, or the Gitas, or the Tao Te Ching, or the Sutras.  I 
suspect (and I may be wrong but I'd bet a good deal of money that 
I'm not) that in a hundred years she will be remembered as an 
important writer of a certain kind of fiction, probably in the same 
rank as L. Frank Baum and T.H. White.  If some of the Christian 
themes pan out, she may also be compared with someone like Dorothy 
Sayers or G.K. Chesterton.  However, I doubt she will be seen in the 
same rank as Tolkien or C.S. Lewis, and I am pretty certain that no 
one is going to be talking about St. Jo the Great.

Oh, and although I appreciate depth psychology as much as the next 
person, I seriously doubt JKR is preparing anybody's subconscious 
for anything.  She is telling a tale that she finds interesting.  
Sometimes a given reader will also find it interesting, sometimes 
they will find it poorly told.  Her writing is usually very good, 
sometimes problematic, often marked by lapses in logic and 
consistency, and sometimes needs about three more rewrites to get 
across what she's trying to sell.  Preparing someone's 
subconscious?  Uhm, no.



  JKR is our 
> teacher.

Speak for yourself, please.  I find JKR a very good example of 
interesting, lucid prose and overall world-building.  But she is 
hardly the person to look to for lessons in tight plotting and logic 
of detail, nor is she always very good at consistent and believable 
characterization or adept shifts of tone.  As for moral lessons, she 
is seemingly a nice person and probably worth listening to as one 
among many (although there are a lot of people in my life I would 
listen to much sooner for a variety of reasons).  But a teacher of 
wisdom?  No.

  And as others have said a good teacher makes the subject 
> fun.  And she has.  And what is the subject?  I think you all 
> already know my answer to that.  ;-)  We shall see.


Yes, we will see.  And there will probably be very little agreement 
about any given outcome.  An ending that will satisfy some will 
anger others.  If Harry ends up sacrificing himself out of some 
greater love, some will find it moving.  That is totally their 
right.  Others, myself included, will find it so ham-fisted and 
silly as to inspire guffaws of laughter.  That is our right.  And 
neither one of us will be incorrect.


Lupinlore