The Possibilities of Grey Snape/Dumbledore/Harry

[lealess]

No: HPFGUIDX 143088

Strangely enough, when justcarol67 was posting her comments, I was
thinking about JKR's assertion that she is "trying to subvert the
genre," a statement made in the July Time Magazine. I assumed she
meant, from the context of the article, subverting some sort of fairy
tale or maybe some kind of romantic fantasy novel -- but the only ones
I could think of which fit the bill were Disneyfied stories.  The
Potter story, on the other hand, seems a standard English 
bildungsroman (albeit mixed with hero quest elements), where an orphan
goes through cruel trials and emerges mature and wise, similar to
Great Expectations, where Pip finds out that he has been supported by
a convict all along, even though he assumed the eccentric Miss
Havisham was his benefactor, or Jane Eyre, where Jane at the end
accepts a difficult, to say the least, man, but only when she is sure
she is his equal (the two stories I remember off the top of my head).

Suppose JKR is truly aiming for subversion of the bildungsroman --
what would such a story look like?  It would be a story where the hero
fails to grow, fails to see the true value of others, fails to find
real love, and fails at the end to become a valuable member of
society.  This sounds like Snape's story so far, or Sirius Black's. 
Somehow, I doubt this is what she has planned for Harry.  Maybe he is
going to die instead of live; this would overturn the bildungsroman
pretty thoroughly.  Problem is, it would still suit an epic journey story.

Maybe JKR is subverting readers' expectations of her message, having
to do with choice and love.  Only sacrificial love measures up to the
gold standard in the books, and only if done for the Good.  Mother
love can be dubious.  Romantic love can weaken those it affects, but
probably only if they are going against predestination.  The love of
friends seems good, but doesn't hold up to Secret Keeping strains. 
There is love for the leader -- problematic.  I think it's safe to say
Rowling shows the social realist downside of love at least as often as
its mythic positive side.

Choice, or even the possibility of it, is also a scarce commodity in
the books.  The wizarding world is full of magical constraints: life
debts, unbreakable vows, DADA curses, goblet contracts, prophecies
which become effective through the action of one person only, the
sorting hat which students believe selects based on innate
character, even if JKR says it isn't so.  Then there are social
constraints: blood, family and class.  Character constraints seem a
minor thing to add to that list.

This author's undermining of the messages of love and choice is what
leads me to fear that Lupinlore might be correct, and the series is
about predetermined character trumping all other factors.  Harry has
accepted his preordained role, right?  No Hamlet he.  Sirius Black ...
well, he probably deserved it.  His choices didn't doom him, it was
the inate character that led him to make those choices.  As for Snape,
it was futile for him to even try to change his life if his fate was
set all along, as it surely must seem now.  This, to me, is
essentially a message of hopelessness, a message repeated by
underprivileged kids I see every day... but, it's very subversive
against the more "politically correct" messages which seek to free
people from social constraints that seem every bit as tenacious as
magical ones.

After HBP, frankly, I question the nature of JKR's message, assuming
there is one.

lealess