Humor and Etiquette WAS Re: polite Dumbledore?

[elfundeb]

No: HPFGUIDX 142776

 Some thoughts on the humor in ch. 3 and our reaction to it --
 bboyminn wrote:
First, this is fiction, not everything exists to a real world
standards. I'm sure JKR meant this chapter to read humorously. Think
about your average TV sit-com; how realistic are they? Not very, but
they are usually funny.
Betsy:
> And here's the thing. I enjoyed Dumbledore's rudeness for the most
> part. His wit was amusing, and I enjoyed seeing Vernon get cut down
> to size and Petunia embarrassed.

Valky:
I'm glad. :D and surprised not to hear this more often in this
discussion. I would think, and hope, that for the most part all
readers enjoyed this scene for it's wit and humour. I know I did, and
that's the more important thing to me in the reading of it, not
Dumbledore being perfect, but the book being enjoyable and
entertaining.

Oh, yes, it's clear that JKR enjoys humor and employs it frequently and
successfully in the books. However, one's reaction to humor is intensely
personal. One of the narrative functions served by the Dursleys is to serve
as the butt of humor. It takes many forms, and it usually works very well.
Often, they provide laughs through their own words; they victimise
themselves (just reread the first chapter of PS/SS).
 However, the particular form of humor JKR is employing here, comeuppance
humor, is not universally appreciated. The etiquette debate in large part
reflects our own emotional reaction to the scene, and our general attitude
toward comeuppance humor. Those of us who are comfortable with comeuppance
humor are prepared to defend Dumbledore's actions (whether or not they were
polite). OTOH, readers who don't like comeuppance humor are going to react
differently to his unorthodox manners.
 Also, I believe that this attempt at comeuppance humor worked far less well
than other instances where JKR has used it on the Dursleys.
 Betsy wrote:
> It was the head banging that
> bothered me. I thought it a bit beneath Dumbledore, frankly. It's
> a bully's way of intimidation, and Dumbledore didn't need to resort
> to it, I think. It was the step too far, for me. (I do like to
> think that Dumbledore was overcome with anger and behaved badly. He
> loves Harry, in his way, plus there is that guilt a_svirn mentioned
> up-thread.)

Though Dumbledore unquestionably has his humorous moments ("Nitwit! Blubber!
Oddment! Tweak!"), I think using a character JKR has described as "the
epitome of goodness" for this purpose has created obstacles for some readers
(myself included) to appreciate the humor. OTOH, in other instances where
JKR has employed slapstick humor at the Dursleys' expense, the agents of the
humor (the twins in GoF and Hagrid in PS/SS) were not the authority figures
that Dumbledore is. Both the twins and Hagrid operate, to varying degrees,
if not outside at least on the edge of the law.
 The context of this scene was different than the other examples. For
example, the GoF scene involved a great many more moving parts: Dudley
gagging, Petunia trying to wrench the tongue out of his mouth, and Vernon
using the china figurines for target practice while Arthur tries to reassure
Vernon that everything will be just fine -- with his wand hand outstretched.
I think (unsurprisingly, I know) that the twins were unfairly taking
advantage of Dudley; whether Dudley was a big bullying git is irrelevant.
Yet I can appreciate the slapstick comedy of the scene.
 Similarly, I didn't think Hagrid should have made Dudley the victim in
PS/SS when his beef was with Vernon, but Dudley's pig tail was quite funny
in its execution, especially Hagrid's deadpan explanation of why the spell
didn't work as intended.

There was a lot less going on in the scene in HBP - just Dumbledore
asserting his authority through a passive-aggressive display of *manners*.
As readers we are a diverse group and have different definitions of what
constitutes good manners. For example, I consider passing out food or drink
to people without asking first if they want it to be very bad manners; thus
I was particularly offended by Dumbledore's assertion that it would have
been better manners for the Dursleys to drink the mead. (Actually, I think
his manners were poor throughout, and thought lealess did an excellent job
of cataloguing my reaction to them.) In fact, I found myself empathising
with the Dursleys as they were being assaulted and sloshed by drinks they
didn't want, and I'm sure JKR did not intend for the reader to have any
sympathy for them.
 For those of us who read Dumbledore's actions as "bad manners" the humor in
the scene was harder to appreciate, although I recognized that the intent
was not to portray Dumbledore as an ill-mannered person. Does this make JKR
a bad writer, or a bad person? Of course not. No author can please every
reader all of the time. But certain types of humor are more universally
appreciated than others, and this scene provokes strong negative reactions
in many people.
 On the other hand, I didn't have any problem with Dumbledore chastising the
Dursleys for their appalling behavior to Harry all these years. And this set
up the one line I thought was truly funny: "Dudley was frowning slightly, as
though he was still trying to work out when he had ever been mistreated."
  Debbie
who also has some thoughts on Petunia's flushed face but will save them for
another post


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]