Werewolves and RL equivalents

[lizzyben04]

No: HPFGUIDX 170310

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" <celizwh at ...> 
wrote:

> houyhnhnm:
> 
> As Dung pointed out, Rowling's statement can be taken 
> two ways.  The more I think about it, the more I am 
> inclined to think that by  "His being a werewolf is 
> really a metaphor for people's reactions to illness 
> and disability," she meant people's reactions to *their own* 
> illness and disability.  I can certainly think of real 
> life examples in my own acquaintance, people who were 
> over-protected as children because of diabetes or 
> epilepsy and who grew up compensating by becoming 
> excessive risk takers, in a couple of cases with tragic results.
> 
> Lupin is compensating for the terrible beast that 
> erupts out of him every month and over which he has 
> no control.  He does it by completely denying his 
> *normal* *human* agression.  He can't get angry.  He 
> can't stand up for anything.  Of course, this misguided 
> attempt does not in any way lessen the severity of his 
> transformations.  All it does is make him a less 
> authentic human being.  Agression takes a dishonest, 
> passive form with Lupin.
> 

lizzyben:
This is an interesting perspective, and it does make a lot of sense. 
So, Rowling wasn't talking about the way society perceives his 
disability, but the way Lupin himself does? I tried to find the full 
quote to get some context -
 
"Professor Lupin, who appears in the third book, is one of my 
favourite characters. He's a damaged person, literally and 
metaphorically. I think it's important for children to know that 
adults, too, have their problems, that they struggle. His being a 
werewolf is a metaphor for people's reactions to illness and 
disability. ... I almost always have complete histories for my 
characters. If I put all that detail in, each book would be the size 
of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, but I do have to be careful that I 
don't just assume that the reader knows as much as I do. Sirius 
Black is a good example. I have a whole childhood worked out for 
him. The readers don't need to know that but I do."

IMO, that one missing sentence makes all the difference - "adults, 
too, have their problems, and they struggle." It seems clear that 
she's talking about Lupin's own struggles w/his disability, not 
making a wider point about societal discrimination. She's talking 
about the histories of each character, and how that history affects 
who they are & how they act. That seems much more in line w/your 
interpretation of this quote. Whew! But even if that was the intent, 
it doesn't seem like that was made clear to readers. 


> In this way, too, he is like Snape.  Both men have 
> learned to fear something which is a natural part of 
> being human, agression in the case of Lupin, anger on 
> the part of Snape, and both have chosen maladaptive 
> ways of dealing it.  Both have shut down their emotions 
> and shut themselves off from human relationships.

lizzyben:
They are both damaged souls, and it's interesting that they were 
both sent back to the source of that damage in HBP - Snape to the 
Death Eaters & Voldemort, Lupin to the werewolves & Fenir. If you 
think of it, that was almost cruel. Lupin's little sad speech about 
going to "my equals, my fellows" was just painful. And those 
maladaptive coping strategies aren't working for either of them: 
Lupin is nice, but becomes passive-aggressive & unreliable, while 
Snape maintains an attitude of cold disdain until he melts into an 
angry, spitting rage. Harry himself seems to be heading down the 
same path - cutting himself off from others (Ginny), and his own 
emotions in order to cope. 

> If you look at Rowling's words this way (and I am 
> more and more inclined to do so), then the paradox 
> disappears.  It is fandom, not Rowling, that has 
> made Lupin a poster boy for political correctness.  
> She's bigger than than that. (Or so I think on Tuesdays 
> and Thursdays.)
>
lizzyben:
I hope so, because as a "politically correct" message against 
prejudice and discrimination, it fails completely. There's a number 
of places in the novels that have this same weird subtext - the 
characters first think some group is a victim of unfair 
discrimination or bigotry, and then realize no, it's actually OK to 
discriminate against them! They actually ARE evil, dangerous, 
servile, etc.

The giants are a good example of this. Hermione says it's no big 
deal if Hagrid is half-giant, & the bad things people say about 
giants (and werewolves) are just a result of prejudice & bigotry. 
Then later on we find out, no, Ron was right - giants are all 
violent, brutal & stupid. Same thing w/elves - Hermione wants them 
to have rights & freedom, but later learns no, they actually like 
slavery, don't want money, and are happiest serving their masters. 

With all of these groups, the liberal message against "bigotry & 
prejudice" is actually subverted by the text itself. The actual 
message becomes that these groups actually are inferior & don't 
deserve equal rights. In the Wizarding World, the bigots are right! 
That's what I find odd. 

Lizzyben