Disappointment Was: Deaths in DH WAS: Re: Dumbledore (but more Snape)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 177497

Lealess:
 that threw out or 
> literally killed off every difficult story line in favor of trite 
> resolutions (house-elf liberation comes down to Hermione/Ron kissing, 
> werewolf liberation and integration come down to one-sentence death, 

Pippin:
When I was Harry's age, I thought my generation would end war,
poverty and discrimination, ban the bomb, save the whales, and
bring back the five cent cigar (j/k on the last one.) I wouldn't
say we completely succeeded :P.  I also wouldn't say we 
made no progress at all but how much of it would be obvious
to someone standing on a railroad platform twenty years later? 
Maybe a little. About like what we saw in DH.  

Lealess:
> house division comes down to Slytherin all bad, yes, even Snape who 
> some continue to view as exclusively selfish and one-note in his 
> motivations, and Slughorn, who some continue to view as hapless and 
> lesser of two evils, and Draco, who some continue to view as cowardly 
> and weak);

Pippin:

Yeah, some continue to view.

Having created anti-Slytherin prejudice, there is nothing JKR
could do or say to erase it from closed minds. Now, I have heard
a lot of things that read to me as anti-Slytherin prejudice, but
I have never heard anyone admit to being an anti-Slytherin
bigot. They always seem to think their opinions are as fair
and balanced as anybody's <g> JKR would have something
to answer for if Slytherins were real...fortunately for her they're
not. 

But suppose she is trying to reach people who are biased but
willing to reconsider on the basis of new information, which
do you think they would find more persuasive -- data
which confirm some faults of the House but also some 
virtues not revealed before -- or a total whitewash? 
 
Lealess:
> I have read eloquent appraisals of DH since its publication, and they 
> all seem like wish fulfillment to me, as if people are filling in the 
> writing that JKR did not do herself, "this is what she meant." 

Pippin:
I don't see why the interpretation of something that's open to 
interpretation should be called wish fulfillment, or doing the
author's work for her. The author's job is to engage our interest.
Any good teacher knows that an intriguing question can do a
better job of that than a pat answer.

Especially for questions to which there are no pat answers. 
Where do you draw the line between ethnic pride and chauvinism?
How do you know that someone has had a change of heart?
What makes a person good?

I used to think HP was about good guys and bad guys. Now
I think it's about more or less damaged people, without
blueprints or instructions, trying to repair the world. There's
a Jewish saying I think fits well with the epilogue: It is
not incumbent on you to finish the work. But neither may
you refrain from it. 

Lealess: 
> For example:
> 
> > <snip> Harry's ability to see certain characters
> > (Snape and Draco in particular) more clearly--finally? 

> I don't see this.  He gave his son "Al" the middle name Severus 
> because of a trait Harry valued, bravery, not because he saw Snape 
> clearly. 

Pippin:
Harry saw Snape as a coward in HBP. How is being able to
recognize Snape's bravery not seeing Snape more clearly?

Lealess:
> He didn't hex Draco on site at the train station presumably 
> because Draco's kept his nose clean, not because he 
>understands him.

Pippin:
If he understands that Draco is capable of keeping his
nose clean, then he understands Draco a lot better than
he did when he suspected Draco of opening the Chamber
of Secrets, or of conspiring with Snape.

Lealess:
> Severus is Al's non-used middle name and what else?  Had 
Harry never  before told Al how brave Snape the Slytherin was?  
Al is 11 years old, after all.  

Pippin:
Of course Al's heard the story before -- but kids don't always 
connect the dots, especially when they're picking up opposing 
messages from other people. But that name -- if the Goldman
family ever names a kid after OJ, or the Kennedy family names a
kid after Oswald, I would think they were making a very strong
statement and it wouldn't be about forgiveness. It would
be about total, one hundred percent exoneration and a down
on the knees in the dust apology for ever thinking otherwise. 
(Not that I remotely think any such thing is called for.)

Maybe I am  a DH evangelist. I enjoyed the book and I'd like 
to share the things I liked about it. I do respect everyone's right 
to do the opposite. One person's wish fulfillment is another's
basket of sour grapes. <g>

Pippin