Lack of re-examination (was:Re: Secrets (Long) OLD POST REPOST)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 186753

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > I don't think it's left for the reader, actually.  Certainly a reader *can* go back and reexamine the times Harry may have stumbled, but since the context is never changed (Draco is never recast as a victim in the ferret scene; Harry casting the cruciatus is never written as a moral mistake) I believe they're going against the text when they do so.  I think the reader is expected to just follow along after Harry and adopt his views as their own.  Especially by series end when he has it all figured out.

> >>Carol responds:
> Quite possibly it depends on the reader. But even an unsophisticated eleven-year-old kid reading GoF for the second time will see him differently now that he knows that "Moody" is a Death Eater. Older, more sophisticated readers will certainly question any of Moody's actions that seemed okay to them at the time and rethink them in relation to his real motives. <snip>

Betsy Hp:
But they don't.  And those that didn't had a better read, I thought, on how the books turned out. (Draco never was redeemed, Harry never did have to rethink the way he interacted with him.)

> >>Carol:
> True, *Harry* doesn't rethink the punishment, but the time has not yet come for him to reassess Draco or for Draco himself to change. We can't expect Harry at fourteen to apply the insights that he will gain from seeing Draco failing to kill Dumbledore in HBP and being forced to Crucio fellow DEs in DH. <snip>

Betsy Hp:
You're right, we can't.  We *can* however (imo), expect Harry to have a moment where he feels uncomfortable about feeling positive about a teacher partly because that teacher smeared a student Harry disliked.  Maybe feel a twinge of sympathy (just a twinge, mind) for Draco being mistreated by a Death Eater Harry was chummy with.  But he doesn't rethink this incident at all.

> >>Carol:
> As for Fake!Moody, there's no point in *Harry's* reassessing his actions. Harry knows what he really was, and he's no longer a threat. He has other things to think about, and other lessons to learn. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
See, that's what bothers me.  Harry witnessed something that in retrospect should have been at least bothersome (hopefully a bit horrifying): a sadistic Death Eater taking his ire out on a school boy.  And Harry wasn't only not bothered by it at the time; it was something he was okay with (if not a bit pleased).  And even after the reveal he never thinks of it.  To my mind there's *tons* of reasons for Harry to reassess *his own* reactions to Barty Jr's actions.  To dismiss it as a lesson not worth learning (and I agree, this is how the text puts it across) is massively problematic to my mind.

> >>Carol:
> There are, no doubt, readers who still approve of the bouncing ferret incident and still think it's funny. But I don't think that's how JKR expects the thoughtful and observant reader to feel.

Betsy Hp:
Why? What in the text indicates to you that JKR expects us to revisit the scene?  She never revisits it as an author.

> >>Carol, who thinks that we *have* to read against the text because we, as readers, know more than Harry does and we can't fully trust his pov or his opinions until the epilogue (and we can choose to disagree with him even then)

Betsy Hp:
There are mysteries to be solved, yes, and the reader can read deeper into the text than Harry can (handicapped by being an actual player on the page, as he is *g*), but to actually read against the text?  I don't think that's what JKR was aiming for.  Rereading the scene and feeling disturbed at what Barty Jr was doing would generally lead (I'd think) to sympathy for Draco.  Yet JKR seemed surprised whenever confronted with that view.

If JKR wanted the reader to rethink the scene, casting Draco as a victim of a Death Eater rather than a bully getting his just desserts from a cool adult figure (like Dudley and Hagrid and the pig-tail), she'd have done so herself.  To leave it entirely up to the reader, but to never give them textual support later on... it's purely conjecture.  And it's very unkind of JKR; all tease, no follow-through. ;)  

> >>Pippin:
> <snip>
> It's a defining fact of human nature that we are able to learn from other people's mistakes. I don't find it a stretch to suppose that Harry learned from Snape and Dumbledore. <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I'm sure he learned something from examining their lives.  The text shows him doing so.  It doesn't show Harry reexamining his own life, though.

> >>Pippin:
> Why would Harry think that a wealthy, popular, much-loved student couldn't abuse his power? James did. Dumbledore did. That Harry has done well for himself would not convince him that he could never go wrong. <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Harry doesn't see himself go wrong, though. Yes, he sees the mistakes others make, but he doesn't examine himself, doesn't catch his own mistakes. His father could abuse his power as the big man on campus, but Harry doesn't notice when he's doing the same.  I don't think the reader is supposed to either.

Betsy Hp