The unattached, the Dursleys, the role of women

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 188130



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" <lealess at ...> wrote:
>
> On unpartnered men:  I do not think that Slughorn, Snape, Dumbledore, Fudge, Hagrid, Voldemort, Pettigrew, Sirius Black, etc., are living lives that JKR would want her readers to emulate.  I'd say the lack of partners in their lives, or even close friends, isolates them and limits their worldviews.

Alla:

Okay, but where in the books JKR says that? That the reason why all those men at some point of his lives do idiotic things is because they have no spouses?

Where does she say that had Fudge had a spouse for example he would be any less of an asshole and more willing to listen? Where does she say that had Slughorn had a spouse (or partner) he would change his patterns of picking and teaching his favorite students?

And what exactly is so limiting in Hagrid's worldview that spouse would help to expand? Note, I am not saying that Hagrid did not do stupid things, quite the contrary, I just do not see how spouse or partner would have changed it. Seems to me that Hagrid's mistakes are due to his personality first and foremost. IMO of course.

Oh and even though it was in the interview, but in her mind Charlie Weasley never married, so what is so very bad or limiting about him?

Lealess:
The unattached women: McGonagall, Umbridge, Skeeter, Trelawney... they may be admirable for their professions, but as people, they are not exactly welcoming or even well-balanced.  

Alla:

I just disagree about Mcgonagall being not well-balanced.

Lealess:
I'm all for living the solo life, but I think JKR is mostly for marriage, family and children. <SNIP>

Alla:

I agree that it is her ideal, I however disagree that she imposes her ideal on her characters and says that anybody who never married is a lacking person, I think to her if person is mostly a negative character  it is due to many other reasons.

Lealess:
> On the preservation of the Dursleys: I think they were placed under wraps in case the Seven Potters plan failed and they needed to be called back to keep the so-called blood protection in place.  Once it was clear the Seven Potters plan worked, they were memory-charmed just like the Grangers and sent on their merry way.  This would be more efficient than having Order members babysit Muggle adults (not that those Order members would serve any better or more logical function in the story).


Alla:

That's a speculation, right? Last time we see Dursleys they are placed under guard, I respect your opinion about what happened next, I however do not see a support for it in canon.



Lealess:
<SNIP> But, she'd never arrogantly assume she knew better than the parents who accepted her all along, who she'd lied to in the past for her convenience (ski trip)?  

Alla:

Yep, she lied to her parents about ski trip, she also OMG went against their wishes and changed her teeth to look better. I still feel that it is incomparable to her doing this to her parents without their consent.

Lealess:
She'd never wipe their minds just to get them off hers? <SNIP>

Alla:

I will never say never of course, but however when the other alternative is *to save their lives and to save Hermione's*, yes to me it is more reasonable than to say she did it "just to get them off hers*  IMO of course.

JMO,

Alla