Some Draco and wish fulfillment WAS: Re: Dark Book - Blood and Cruelty

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 177226

Amy:
<SNIP>

And I realize that it's weird to everyone that 
> Draco just keeps coming back. Maybe it is JKR's set-up to make us 
> cheer for the good guys (although I don't like the implication I 
have 
> to be manipulated into what to cheer for, and when; it's not like 
> there's an Imperius curse on the books, readers can choose for 
> themselves what they like about the heroes and what they don't.). 
If 
> it is, though, a lot more goes into it than just making sure Draco 
is 
> there at the right moment to be beaten up; because even a six-year-
> old wouldn't cheer for Draco et al being beaten up if Draco 
> hadn't...for lack of better words, been getting on everyone's 
nerves 
> and going unchecked for it for a fairly long time (read: almost the 
> entire book). *That* is something that some readers CAN relate to, 
> which, I assume, is why there are so many people cheering in the 
> first place. 
> 
> It's not just that Draco starts the particular confrontations in 
> which he gets beaten up; if it were, it'd be impossible to see why 
> Draco would keep coming back. But most of the time, Draco *does* 
make 
> fun of the Trio with little-to-no retaliation before they actually 
> strike, which is what I think most of the cheering squad responds 
to. 
> I'd say the amount of times Draco verbally goes after the Trio, and 
> the number of times they retaliate physically, is about a 3:1 
ratio. 
> You can't see why Draco would keep coming back for that? They're 
not 
> the best odds in the world, and yes, it still seems like wish 
> fulfilment, but there are realistic aspects there, too.
><SNIP>


Alla:

I soooo agree with everything you said and with everything I snipped 
too, but let me elaborate a little bit on Draco coming back as well.


I mean, Draco can be coming back for all the reasons you mentioned, 
but also um, it is not like it pulls me out of the story.

I find nothing problematic with the bad guy who could not get what he 
wanted from his victims ( or potential victims) to try to do it over 
and over again. What is so strange about that?


And now I want to ramble off about wish fulfillment and it is not 
really a question to you, but more to list members who seem to write 
it off as a bad thing, or it seems to me. Was Nyta the last one who 
mentioned it?

So it is the question to her and anybody else, really.

I mean, isn't every writer, especially fantasy writer when she or he 
writes any book to some extent engages in wish fulfillment?

Meaning that writer imagines the worlds that exist only in their 
imagination and I would assume author may want to visit such world 
and put that on paper. And sure, maybe author would give to one or 
more of the characters some qualities of real people or even some 
qualities of that writer.

That is now bad? Isn't that irrelevant for evaluating that writer's 
skill as long as the story is done skillfully and the characters are 
good?

Or if indeed the wish fulfillment in putting bad guys down, so what?

I mean as long as story is done well, why should it matter that the 
main villain of the story suffered the horrible fate partially 
because that villain has some qualities of the real person or not.

Does it matter what influenced author's thoughts when she was putting 
the story on paper?

Or does it only matter as long as the characters we like suffered a 
horrible fate?

I am absolutely seriously wondering. I keep reading the *wish 
fulfillment** as if it is the worst thing JKR could do. 

For example to go back to Snape and that teacher that she supposedly 
partially used as RL basis for Snape.

Um, from that article that was quoted as far as I remember, he 
refused her mother a job when she was in a tough situation, the 
mother who is now dead. He only asked her mother to come work for 
him, when the other person could not do it.

He may have been many times right that her mother was not qualified 
for that job, but don't you think that JKR may not have warm fuzzy 
feelings towards that person regardless? 

So, JKR starts writing Harry Potter. I mean, if she started writing 
Harry Potter with one purpose in mind to get back at that person, I 
would seriously wonder about her mental state.

But something tells me that the reason JKR started to write Harry 
Potter had very very little to do with getting back   at that teacher.

I think she you know, imagined Harry as she said ( on the train or 
somewhere else) and just started a story because she saw the story in 
her mind.

Time comes when she invisions Snape's character and he is you know, 
fills his place in the story, etc, but among other thoughts in JKR's 
head ( not that I can read those thoughts obviously, just speculating)

there is a thought that let's make Snape just as nasty as that 
teacher I knew.


I mean, it fits the story, no?

Oh oh and of course I do not even know if JKR indeed wanted to do 
that, didn't she say that Lockhart is the only character based on 
real person, I am just saying that if she did want to portray some 
nastiness of that teacher in Snape, I think she did it because she 
fits **Snape** as a character, not because she wanted to randomly 
stuck the teacher in the story as Snape Sue or Teacher Sue and 
exercise her revenge over him.

Just my opinion,

Alla, rambling one.