Sexist JKR? Was Re: ESE!McGonagall (not what you think)

[caspenzoe]

No: HPFGUIDX 164718

> Carol responds:
> Yes, evidently, that's the problem. You're "exercised" by what you
> consider to be an important issue, athe supposed sexism of the 
books,
> and I'm completely indifferent to charges of sexism, ageism, racism
> (as if Harry and Aunt Petunia were members of different races!),
> speciesism or any other kind of -ism. 

Snip

> Carol, who has nothing more to say on this topic but will (silently)
> accept your apologies if they're offered

Caspen: 

Of course my apologies are offered! They were in advance last time. 
I've tried to develop something of a habit of offering advance 
apologies as I have been known to suffer from bouts of nearly 
terminal tactlessness and feistiness. 

I further assure you that my gloves are snuggly fitted onto my 
fingers, and I intend to keep them there for the remainder of this 
post. I have even resolved, in another post above, to keep my hands  
in my pockets for a while in order to keep my little gloved fingers 
from pointing at others.

All that said, I do want to thank you for your response, which did 
include a wealth of the canonical evidence I asked for. As I
mentioned I'm going to begin re-reading the series again, and, I 
want to note the instances you've pointed out - not - you'll be 
relieved - to continue this particular disagreement - but because I 
am genuinely interested in (and not just exercised about) this 
subject.

I appreciate your more textual approach and, appearances to the 
contrary, do not make a habit of judging all books by their politics. 
I usually make a point of trying to read them on their own terms, and 
I've even been known to enjoy them. However, I feel compelled to make 
an exception with regard to JKR's work for several reasons, all of 
which are probably grossly unfair to her. 

First, her work is so unusually (especially for a work of modern 
children's fiction) and so well-grounded in English literary 
tradition. As a lover of the tradition, and also, to be honest, as an 
incurable subversive (which is probably what drew me into the whole 
ESE McG thread to begin with), I'd really like to see this grand 
tradition, as I would all good traditions, added to and not just 
followed. 

Second, her series is incredibly popular fiction that a generation of 
children have actually grown up with. My niece, for example, read the 
first book in her early years of grade school, and will read the last 
this summer as she is preparing for her final year of high school. 
Because of this generational popularity, the books' influence on her  
future values and those of the English-reading world bound to be 
large. 

Third, the series' probable influence can't be confined to the 
English reading world, becuase, Harry's really become a global 
cultural phenomenon as well. Therefore, I think the books' particular 
politics are globally important, any and all literary considerations 
aside. 

Fourth and finally, although I'm well-aware that JKR would be loathe 
to agree with me on this one, Harry's story is our first clear case 
of a truly globally and truly "interactive" (in several senses) 
cultural phenomenon. thus, I don't think I can possibly overstate 
(though I'm sure I'll continue to try) the importance of the series' 
politcs and paradigms to our cultural and political future on our 
ever-shrinking planet.

JMO. I suppose I could be exaggerating just a bit here. Again, as a 
die-hard subversive, I really do like to take the most extreme view 
whenever possible. 

Sincerely Carol, I am very sorry to have offended you, so I hope I 
can, indeed, consider my apology accepted.   

Ciao,

Caspen