The Overarching message - Caning + Mind Reading, of sorts

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 191710



--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sigurd at ... wrote:
>
> Dear Potioncat.
> 
> Ok, if it's real next time it's cold and rainy cast an "impervious" spell over yourself (or whatever Hermione used to water-proof Harry's glasses) and leave the umbrella home and go in flip-flops.
> 
> All of these things you name, "Never-Never-Land", "Oz" etc, are fictional constructs and have no hard reality. Their authors can spin what fables and fairy-tales they wish. But the world we live in does have reality and in fact is the only reality that the hypothetical fantasy worlds can exist in. That is through enactment of principles from that hypothetical construct here.
> 
> ...
> 
> Otto
>


Steve:

No fictional worlds are not real, but we must treat them as if they are. Within that fantasy world, they are real, and to have a sense of realism to the reader, they must also have a reasonable internal logic. 

We analyse within the world of Harry Potter, which in the world of Harry Potter exists within the real world, if you can follow that. 

Vermon and Petunia are muggles, Vernon works for a company that make drills, not magical drills but muggle drills. That world has Prime Minister in charge of the muggle government. There policemen, firemen, doctors, lawyers, plumbers, dentists, and most icons of the muggle world. So, it is fair to fame that fictional world as if it were in the real world, just with the added bonus of magic among a select few. 

That is the only way to analyze this world, as if it were real. Now we still have the option of perspective to analyze with world from different angles. We can speculate and pontificate as if we were some one residing in that world, We can few it as the reader looking in form the outside. And we can straddle the middle ground. 

But unless we are specifically contrasting the real world vs the magical world, we do apply both the real world rules, and the magical world rules. 

Take Quidditch; what country in the world would let such a brutal game exist? Muggles, even if they could fly on brooms, would be slaughtered in that game. However, we also see that magical people have a very high resilience. That can tolerate battering and bruising that muggles simply can not. Hagrid was outrage by the idea that something as mundane as an alleged car crash could kill James and Lily, as an example. 

The world of Harry Potter does exist ... within the confines of the books. There it IS real, and there it has to have some degree of internal logic or we would have never believed it. 

Yes, there are several perspectives from which to approach our analysis of Harry Potter, but whether internal to the world or external, we must act and speak as if that world did exist. 

On the issue of abuse, certainly there are many who adamantly feel that there is 'abuse' everywhere, and within a certain context, they are right. But only within a certain context.

Some feel that Harry was horrible and criminally abused by the Dursley's. But, Harry is a live, well, and unharmed, not his life isn't exactly pleasant. But there are kids who are abused in the most horrible and egregious manner in the world, and it seem unfair to those who are abused in the extreme to overuse that term when referring to Harry Potter. 

Harry is not dying, his spirit is not being crushed, he is not being physically damaged. Yes, with in a certain expanse of the definition of abuse, Harry was being abused; though I would be more inclined toward neglected, but not criminally so. 

There are always those who react in the extreme to everything in the wizarding world. As I have said before, to some Harry in an annoying little brad who puts himself and everyone else in danger by a total disregard for the rules. Some see the Twins as horrible bullies who need to be in jail, or at minimum placed under an ASBO. 

I strongly disagree with those people and we have had long discussions about degrees of behavior. Those holding that opinion seem entrenched, and so beyond a certain point, there is no point in arguing with them. 

As to the Occlumency lessons and similar subjects being discussed, I somewhat side with Shaun, we have to let the world itself show us the right and wrong of any one thing. If the fictional world, or some segment of it, is outraged by something, or if the story, as in the case of the Elves, points out an injustice to us, then we should be appropriately outraged. 

Let's take the case of Sirius Black, which has been discussed in depth before. Some are outraged by the lack of a fair trial, but let's remember that Sirius offered no defense or explanation. In fact, stricken with grief over the events, he essentially admitted to being responsible for James and Lily's death. How much of a trial do you need when the suspect confesses? 

Now that we know the whole story, we see the context of that seeming confession, yet within the wizard world, they haven't read the books yet, and they do not see the context we see. In their minds and eyes, he admitted to being responsible, and that seems reasonably to be a case closed, especially when Sirius never explains the context or offers any defense. 

The very fact that we can discuss these various things in so much detail and with so many dissenting opinions, demonstrated the complexity of that world and of JKR's writing. I worlds that are simplistic, they are far less intriguing, and far less discussion worthy, simply because the underlying world is drawn in such easy to understand black and white. Harry Potter, to some extent is morally ambiguous on many points JKR does not lay it out for us an a tidy cut and dried manner. Harry is not a heroic saint; he is flawed and broken, yet resilient and honest. The same is true of Snape, or Dumbledore, or the Twins, or Sirius, or any of the other characters or events. 

They are not tied up in pretty easy to understand moralistic bows, and that is what makes this world so realistic and interesting, far more interesting the much of the teen pap fodder that is foisted on young readers. With JKR, she doesn't paint the perfect picture for us, she doesn't give us all the tidy answer. If she did, we would have simply read the books and moved on. 

The fact that we are still discussing these events establishes that this if a morally and socially complex world with no easy answers. 

At least, in my not so humble but rambling opinion.

Steve/bboyminn