Bad Writing? (was: JKR and the boys)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 162461

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Lambert <anigrrrl2 at ...> 
wrote:

>    
>   I could read Potter books everyday, and I think JKR's plotting is 
pretty incredible. I admit that her handling of teen romance is 
fairly awkward, but I would rather talk about the books' strengths 
than the weaknesses. I would rather discuss plot theories than talk 
about why JKR's writing is substandard. I guess, in short, I agree 
with Eggplant, but felt the need to add that lupinlore is NOT the 
only person on this list who seems to hate the books and think JKR is 
a hack. 
>    


Not a hack, perhaps.  But she is certainly trying to sell certain 
messages, and her sales pitch is often dismal.

Dumbledore is the character where this is most readily apparent.  She 
has built the entire moral thrust of the series around the character 
of Dumbledore - i.e. the "epitome of goodness."  Fair enough.  But 
when you call somebody an epitome of goodness you are making an 
extreme statement, and you shouldn't be surprised when it explodes on 
you.  "Trying very hard" wouldn't be difficult to swallow.  "Well-
meaning" would cover most people, except for the Puppetmaster!DD 
folks.  But "epitome of goodness" opens up extraordinarily disturbing 
questions -- especially when said epitome of goodness behaves in 
reprehensible ways in order to make the plot go the way JKR wants it 
to go.  As phoenixgod has pointed out, plot rules over character in 
the Potter series -- DD is the epitome of goodness but behaves in 
contemptible ways in order to present challenges for Harry but 
remains an epitome of goodness -- why?  Because JKR says so?  And 
there is where the derision comes in.  

As for mulching the books -- absolutely.  My hard-earned money 
plopped down for them gives me the absolute right to do anything I 
want to with them if I find them to be garbage and decide they are 
worthy of it -- including using them for toilet paper if I so desire 
(although that would be an expensive bout of diarrhea).  And yes, if 
she continues on the reprehensible course of approving of the abuse 
of children -- by having her epitome of goodness stand around 
approvingly while it happens -- then they will be worthy of 
mulching.  If JKR decides her feelings are hurt -- which she won't 
because I suspect she could have no more respect for my views than I 
have for hers -- then she can comfort herself by counting the zeros 
in her checking account.

But DD is of course not the only example.  For others, it's Hermione 
and Marietta.  Not my issue, but the basic principles are the same. 
Same with the twins.  Same with Remus Lupin.  Same with Memory 
Charms.  Same with House Elves and SPEW.  Same with the House 
System.   You simply can't make sweeping moral claims (and that IS 
what JKR is doing, for all her protests about not liking to preach) 
without inviting sweeping moral claims in return.  And when you make 
statements about "epitome of goodness" and "very wise man" 
and "nothing wrong with X except Y" then you elevate those characters 
to moral avatars -- i.e. you engage in preaching and sweeping moral 
statements -- whether you itended to or not.  

As for JKR as a person -- well, as someone has pointed out you are 
dealing with JKR the public person, which may or may not bear any 
relation to JKR the private person.  Nonetheless, when you have a 
high-profile public persona, people will make such judgments, whether 
you want them to or not, and you are well advised to find what 
comfort you can in your bank account and your party invitations, 
because it will never stop.  And so some will say "JKR is a lovely 
person and I think she's a wonderful writer and it's great her giving 
money to charity."  However, others will say "I don't like you very 
much, JKR.  You have an ice cold heart and a death neurosis, and it's 
silly beyond belief."  

<Shrug.>  Writers and artists are in an unenviable position, as they 
tend to be sensitive souls who, if successful, are pressed into a 
harsh limelight.  But I have no pity or sympathy for them at all.  It 
is the life they have chosen, and they are free to retire from the 
field anytime they wish.  If they want to have their cake and eat it 
too -- as Stephen King has tried in recent years, acting like a 
little boy who wants to pick up his toys and go home because people 
actually have the temerity to say that some of most recent work has 
been flawed and not up to his earlier standards -- then they are 
asking for further trouble.


Lupinlore