Orphans - Harry and Tom

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 150866

> Alla:
> > 
> > Lovely post, Ceridwen. I am not sure I agree with your ultimate 
> > conclusions though, if I understand them correctly. Are you 
saying 
> > that with Tom's story JKR basically changes the "orphan story 
set 
> > up" completely?
> 
> Ceridwen:
> She changed the window dressing of the orphan story with Harry, 
even 
> before she changed it with Tom.  Harry doesn't act like a house 
elf, 
> which is what all those poor but honest orphans (and partial 
orphans, 
> since I do own a copy of The Five Little Peppers and How They 
Grew) 
> sound like.  Thankful for a moldy crust of bread, dew-eyed and 
> subservient.  Harry made the orphan realistic, with feelings and 
> pride.  Tom completely upended it, yes, in contrast with Harry. 
who 
> gave the traditional orphan more believability.

Alla:

Not that I am really disagreeing with what you are saying. I guess 
all that I am saying is that I don't think JKR changed that much in 
the "orphan set up" so to speak, I guess to me she developed it or 
maybe took it to another level, I don't know. I mean, sure, with 
every book Harry acts more and more defiant towards Dursleys, but at 
the same time to me PS/SS WAS the classic "Cinderella" set up, where 
Harry indeed works as a house elf, abused, neglected, then discovers 
new world and leaves the old one behind, you know - all the classic 
orphan stuff. At the same time while I am saying that i don't see 
the radical changes, those changes MUST be somewhere, don't they? I 
mean, I also read plenty of stories about orphans and while I 
definitely sympathized with many of those characters, Harry is the 
orphan with whom I sympathize the most. 

I think that maybe the difference is that JKR truly lets Harry grew 
up, you know, books gets darker and darker and as Harry grows up, 
indeed he changes from traditional orphan to becoming CAPSLOCK 
Harry, etc?

I don't know, I would love to figure out this phenomenon, but not 
sure I am successful.


 
> Alla:
> > You see, if Tom was the only orphan in the story , I would 
probably 
> > agree with you, but as you said she contrasts Tom and Harry and 
> > between those two, her sympathies lie with Harry. SO, I am 
afraid 
> > that my answer will sound trivial and I indeed thought about it, 
> > because I wanted to do your post justice, but I could not change 
my 
> > answer.
> 
> Ceridwen:
> Even with Tom not being the only orphan in the story, we all knew 
he 
> was orphaned, and I think very few of us expected the completely 
evil 
> from day one child we were shown.  Our expectations of the orphan 
set 
> us up to be surprised.

Alla:

Actually, I honestly was NOT surprised when I read about Tom's 
personality in his early years. In a general terms ( not in the 
details of course) this was what I expected Tom to be during his 
childhood. You see, as someone who is convinced that Potterverse 
characters have a very BIG part of who they are, the essential part 
of them so to speak, I could not expect Tom, who "never loved 
anybody" be a normal child and  it turns out that he indeed was not.

Not that I was not surprised at all, it is just I did not expect the 
traditional sympathetic orphan to "play the part" of young Mr. 
Riddle. So, I am still inclined to think that JKR just shows Tom's 
nature shining through so to speak.

Where I was surprised was the portrayal of orphanage. I sort of 
expected to find out that truly evil people raised Tom and that is 
also played a part in his upbringing. Hmmm, does it mean that I did 
have traditional expectations of how orphan is supposed to be 
portrayed after all? You ask tough questions, Ceridwen. :)


 
<SNIP of the completely agreeable part about why Tom is looking for 
family>


JMO,

Alla