The unattached, the Dursleys, the role of women

[sartoris22]

No: HPFGUIDX 188134

lealess:

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. 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. I'm all for living the solo life, but I think JKR is mostly for marriage, family and children. The perversion of that ideal, putting another above it, doomed the Gaunts and Crouches, and Bellatrix Lestrange. The preservation of that ideal ultimately saved the Malfoys and the Dursleys. Marriage and children are the happy and hopeful endings for the heroes, and even Draco. While it was great to have many unpartnered people in the story, they were also more likely to die than those in happy families.

sartoris22:

You make a good point about the novel championing marriage and children, but one could argue that love and connection doom characters such as Snape, Tonks, Dobby, Sirius, Lily, and James. Thus, love or marriage or children aren't without sacrifice, which can lead to destruction. Even Harry "dies' for love, but is ultimately resurrected. Yes, love, marriage, and children can make one happy, but they don't make one safe. In fact, they can expose one to danger. In the Potter world, everything, it seems, comes with a price, which lends a certain equality to the unpartnered versus partnered life.