Further Notes on Literary Uses of Magic and Anti-Globalization in Harry Pott

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 168199

> >>Betsy wrote:
> > <snip>
> > The DA *was* segragated.
> > <snip>

> >>dan:
> You've removed the only thing that matters here - the DA is working
> for good, not evil. This is not an aside, this is essential.

Betsy Hp:
And yet, the DA *doesn't* go up against the big evil (Voldemort).  
They go up against the MoM, which while described as misguided is 
never really described as full out evil.  Fudge even comes back to 
seem a bit sympathetic in the beginning of HBP.

Yes, Umbridge is a bad egg, but she could be seen as an example of 
ruthless self-righteousness taken to the extreme.  She's Hermione's 
dark side.  And so I *do* think the DA shows the early signs of 
becoming exactly like the MoM.  A power that cannot be questioned, in 
total control of the information it shares.

> >>dan:
> Rowling is realistic, not idealistic - her world is partisan, she   
> does not say loyalty is all one - loyalty to Voldemort and his     
> cause is bad, loyalty to Dumbledore and his is good. This doesn't   
> justify extremes of violence, but the DA doesn't either - they are 
> focussed on outing what they know is going on behind the scenes.

Betsy Hp:
Actually, the DA is focused on learning. According to what the powers 
that be (ie the Trio, or Hermione) told their members, the DA was 
strictly a study club.

> >>dan:
> As for Marietta - what do you think the DE would have done with a
> traitor? So she gets snitch (heh) on her forehead. She gave
> information to collaborators that endangered the very essential
> mission the DA was on - to show the world the truth. Marietta's
> marking was roundly deserved.

Betsy Hp:
Heh.  Speaking of justifing extremes of violence...   So you're 
saying that branding the face of a teenage girl for listening to her 
family rather than the popular kids is *always* a good idea, and 
perfectly civilized too.  I mean, as long as your cause is *good* of 
course.  Not that the plebeians can *question*, of course.  The fact 
that your cause is good should be understood.  Any questioners should 
be physically threatened and/or punched in the nose (Zach Smith).

And I'll say, that if the Deatheaters didn't go for straight out 
killing (which, I'm pretty sure they would) I can see them getting 
behind the sort of public humiliation a facial branding would give.  

> >>Betsy: 
> > (The way Hermione deals with her feelings for Ron encapsulates the
> > problems with emotional youth, IMO.)

> >>dan:
> The world is composed of people who are just a "unknowing" of their
> emotional world. It indicates that Hermione is human, and is capable
> of love at all, not that she's some kind of emotional cripple.      
> Aren't all teenagers weird that way, and many adults?

Betsy Hp:
Well, no.  I hope not.  I generally think if a sixteen year old 
caused his or her love interest physical injury because of their own 
mixed up emotions that's not a normal or good thing.

> >>montims:
> In this respect, I think it's worth remembering that JKR worked for 
> a while for Amnesty, and she has a link to Amnesty International on 
> her website. This is an organisation that deliberately works to    
> subvert the government of countries that practice human rights     
> abuses. Active opposition to bad practices, regardless of the      
> source or intentions of such practices.

Betsy Hp:
Which makes me hopeful that JKR is aware of the questionable actions 
she's having her good guys take.  Because I still think the less 
obvious bad behavior of the good guys could do a lot more damage than 
the very obvious bad behavior of the bad guys.

For example, we all know murder (Karkaroff) is bad.  But I've seen so 
many people that I otherwise think of as good people and good 
thinkers support what happened to Marietta.  I mean seriously, would 
people *really* like to see that punishment added to their country's 
penal code?  Would Amnesty International be cool with it?

But because it was Hermione inflicting it on a "red shirt" (someone 
the readers had no emotional investment in) it becomes 
something "well deserved".

Either JKR is very clever or very disturbing.  I await DH to find out 
which is correct. <g>

> >>montims:
> As to the "Hitler Youth" reference, I really think that parallel is 
> to the Slytherin group that Umbridge grooms. Her whole sequence of  
> edicts to me is very reminiscent of the way a totalitarion         
> authority gradually erodes peoples' rights until they suddenly      
> realise that they have none, and the use of a group of people in    
> that authority's good graces while, or because, they spy on and    
> intimidate their peers, is very chilling.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Oh yes, I wouldn't deny that.  However, one of the things I found 
most chilling about the Hitler Youth is that it trained children to 
turn on their parents.  I remember reading about it (or watching a 
media presentation in High School) and thinking that no matter how 
indoctrinated I might have become into something (and I could see how 
the Hitler Youth program would have been attractive to German 
children at that time) I would *never* betray my family.  Never.

I also recall that as a student (and heck even now, for that matter) 
if someone referenced their parents in a discussion it was time to 
start walking carefully.  You don't just tell someone that their mom 
is an idiot or their father a bigot.  Because if that person was any 
bit worth their salt you'd have just lost the argument.  No matter 
what they might be leaning towards deciding, you've just challenged 
their family and anyone of character would stand with their family no 
matter the family's flaws.

Of course it could be worked around, but not forced.  Both Harry and 
Hermione (and Ron too, IIRC) tried to force people to stand against 
their families.  Which was not something I admired either of them 
for, and sent up red flags to me as to their activities.  Sure the 
DeathEaters are worse.  But that doesn't make the DA a stand up club 
of truth and justice.

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > The billion dollar question for me is whether JKR is doing this   
> > on purpose, or whether this stuff is sneaking in under her radar.

> >>dan:
> Rowling is slipping in under many readers radar, I think, a radical
> thesis of direct action.

Betsy Hp:
If JKR is in control of her message (and not a crazy shrew <g>) then 
I think her series will be one for the ages.  If she's *not* in 
control of her message, and if therefore some of the more disturbing 
stuff (at least, disturbing as per me <g>) is given de facto author 
approval then I think her series will be one for Lupinlore's chipper.

Betsy Hp (All opinions expressed above are my own.  JKR was not hurt 
in this typing. <g>)