[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's inability to perform occlumency/Views of Hermione/Wizards as racists

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 160595

 bboyminn:
>
> I don't think the key point is so much that Harry couldn't
> learn Occlumency, but more that he didn't. Though the
> degree to which he truly didn't remains to be seen in the
> final book. Several times in the Occlumency classes Harry
> did very effectively block Snape's access to his thoughts.
> So, we know it is possible for him to do it if he is
> sufficiently motivated.

Magpie:
I believe he was able to shove Snape's own Legilimency charm back with 
shield charms, but never really did Occlumency, which is cloaking his own 
mind and separting himself from his emotions.  JKR, I thought, went further 
than saying Harry wasn't particularly good at it.  I thought she implied it 
was a skill that was pretty much lost to him because he was both too damaged 
and not someone who naturally could compartmentalize.  I got the impression 
she thought this was a good thing, so I don't think Harry's going to have to 
learn Occlumency--though interestingly it looked like in her original notes 
Harry was supposed to get better at it.  So perhaps he will eventually 
manage it to a point, but I'd be interested in seeing how JKR did it if that 
were the case.

Snape's methods certainly didn't help but I think most of Harry's trouble 
with Occlumency comes from himself and not just the teacher.  So while I 
wouldn't necessarily say Harry could never gain the skill at all, I don't 
think the point of OotP was entirely that it's entirely Snape's fault Harry 
didn't learn it. Even within canon Harry actively works against what Snape 
is trying to teach him on principle and not just because it's Snape.  I 
thought it was stupid that nobody explained to Harry why he shouldn't be 
curious about the door either, but at the same time Harry was rather dense 
to not figure it out himself or ask that directly.  (Hermione might have 
suggested the reason to him, iirc)  They certainly hinted at the reason 
enough, and Harry was old enough that his own stubborness can't be 
completely blamed on the teacher.  He'd have had those same problems with 
Lupin teaching him, and I'm not sure Lupin's usually more effective 
guilt-trip control of Harry would have worked in that case.

Alla:

I believe the parallel towards racism in the books goes mainly towards 
Muggleborns though. And Muggles, well I believe JKR is trying to set two 
worlds apart sometime succesfully, sometimes not. So, while I agree that 
many good guys have patronising attitude and prejudice towards Muggles, I do 
not remmber anybody on the good side wishing **either** Muggles or 
Muggleborns to die.

Magpie:
Yes, the parallels in the book are all about Muggleborns, not Muggles. I'm 
just saying I think wynnleaf calls it something other than racism because 
Pureblood/Muggleborn doesn't seem like a direct parallel, though the mindset 
is the same. Racism doesn't mean you necessarily want to kill people of the 
other race.  You just have to judge them on their race, usually as inferior.

eggplant:
> Don't be silly, without Hermione's curse that piece of filth called
> Marietta would have spilled the beans in Umbridge's office, including
> the fact that Harry was the leader and they had been meeting illegally
> for many months. And this would have been long before Dumbledore could
> help, it would have been long before Dumbledore even knew about it. As
> it was Marietta's evil treachery caused Sirius's death and probably
> many others. In the real world she would  not have gotten acne, she
> would have gotten a bullet in the brain. And I would shed no tears
> over her.

Magpie:
Err...no, I don't think in the real world (if by that you mean the societies 
most of us live in) she would have been shot at all. That's more like an 
alternate universe where anything certain characters don't like is 
punishable by no-strings-attached death, followed grave-dancing, and any 
ethical situation comes down to one person being the avenging angels and the 
other person being evil Nazis resonsible for anything bad that happens. 
It's more like a video game than an actual world.  Even nobody in canon 
suggests killing Marietta.

Like it or not, your view of murder is openly rejected by the good side and 
one of the defining characteristics of the bad.

eggplant:
> Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of revisionism, but this Marietta is
> a hero and Hermione is a villain business just won't fly.

Magpie:
You certainly are a fan of revisionism if what you're getting from this 
discussion is Marietta=hero and Hermione=a villain.

-m