Story analysis (Was: Whose side are we on?)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 156139

Carol responds:
> Although I respect your feelings here, I can't agree that there's
such
> a thing as "emotional analysis." Analysis is a purely intellectual
> exercise and emotions get in the way of it (just as they get in the
> way of Occlumency for Harry). I realize that none of us can
completely
> set aside our feelings about a particular character (unless it's
> someone we don't care one way or the other about like, say, Rufus
> Scrimgeour), but I think it's important to at least make the effort
to
> examine the canon evidence objectively.

Alla:

I disagree completely. I don't think that analysis of the fictional
story if done with the emotions not **turned off** completely means
that objectivity is lost.

I am not talking about analyzing technical elements of the story, I
am talking about analyzing the characters as a reader.
The non – fiction book can be analyzed on purely technical level, 
fictional book 
IMO does not have to be analyzed that way, unless we are talking 
about technical aspects of it. I mean, it can, but it does not have 
to.		

Moreover, I think JKR does not mean for us to shut off emotional
acceptance of the story, IMO of course.

I think the story where emotions play such a big part and one of them
is bound to play major role in the end, is meant to be analyzed with
all your senses. I think it only enhances the pleasure of doing it.
Again, JMO.

As to examining canon evidence objectively, Hmmmm. IMO unless canon 
evidence is an absolute fact (Snape is the Head of Slytherin, for 
example), our emotions play the huge part into how we interpret 
ambiguous evidence, as it should be, otherwise half of the fun is 
lost IMO.
For example, you view Snape a teacher as being sarcastic to his 
students and you think that you are being objective, right?

I view Snape as teacher who **so** abuses his authority. Do I think 
that I am being objective? I absolutely do, but I analyse the same 
evidence you do, just come to the different conclusions. Do my 
emotions play a part in it? Sure as in I care for the characters 
Snape mistreats, but regardless of that fact do I think that Snape's 
actions can be interpreted differently? No, I don't. I mean, they can 
be of course, it is just I don't see it. Actually, I do see how 
different degrees of Snape's **jerkiness** can be seen, hehe.
But after certain point, emotions or not, I just don't see how his 
actions can be viewed other than **teacher who abuses his 
authority**. I mean, I personally view him as abuser. I do see how 
this interpretation could be too much for others, what I don't see 
how Snape becomes just **sarcastic** teacher. Do I think that I view 
the evidence objectively? Yes, I do.

Carol:
> But the point I'm trying to make is that one person's emotions
have no
> influence on the way another person reads a particular scene.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Of course, the point I am trying to make though is when I feel
something for the character or the event, it makes me work harder to
find canon support for it.


Carol:
<SNIP>
> Let me reverse the equation for a moment. My emotional reaction to
the
> Twins' actions is sympathy for Dudley and for Petunia, who thinks
her
> son is dying, combined with a kind of horror/disgust/embarrassed
> amusement at the irony of poor Petunia trying to yank out Dudley's
> tongue and increasing her son's agony as she tries to save him. I
> can't convince anyone else to feel that way because our emotional
> reactions, like our tastes and prejudices, are our own.

Alla:

Well, yes, but based on that if you could show **why** you feel
sympathy for Dursleys, then you could convince somebody ( not me
obviously), but somebody?

Carol:
> Look at Bob Ogden's reasoning when Morfin hexes Tom Riddle. < HUGE
SNIP, including quote> It seems to me that the Morfin/Gaunt/Ogden
scene is intended to
> illustrate the view of the situation that JKR wants the reader to
> take. Yes, even the good Wizards like Mr. Weasley and Mr. Ogden are
> condescending toward Muggles, and, yes, it's disturbing that they
> would resort to Obliviating Muggles to maintain the WW's secrecy.
But
> nevertheless, Ogden is pointing out to Gaunt (and Morfin) that it's
> wrong to use magic on a defenseless Muggle regardless of what the
> Muggle has done to deserve it.

Alla:

And it seems to me that this scene is completely different from
situation with twins, because it seemed to me that no matter how much
Morfin claims that he did it because his sister loved Riddle, he is
clearly IMO shown to have contempt for Muggles in general.


Carol:
> IMO, the Twins, like Harry, must learn that actions have
consequences
> and that it is not their place to punish wrongdoers. They didn't
learn
> from the toffee incident, but perhaps they'll learn from the
Vanishing
> Cabinet. The good guys can't mistake vengeance for justice and
remain
> good guys.

Alla:

And I don't think that anybody else can punish bad guys but good guys
and then they can forgive them, hehe. :)
I mean, if you don't think that bad guys should be punished at all,
that is your right, as I mentioned earlier, I want them to suffer
**Big time**, before any forgiveness will occur.

I think we want different things from the ending, heee. I suspect
that JKR will find a way in that aspect to satisfy us both - as in
bad guys or formerly bad guys will suffer a little and be forgiven.

But as I mentioned before I am pretty optimistic that Karma will find
Umbridge and Dursleys and Ssssssss. :)

JMO,

Alla.