The Sad Yet Not Wholly Unexpected Fate of the Harmonian Peace Talks
A few weeks ago, I was told that the Harmonians were starting up a discussion forum so we could all get to understand their point of view. I figured it would all end in wank, so I did not join the glad throngs merrily tripping their way to the HMS Harmony Discussion Forum. For a while, I forgot about the Harmonians.

Then someone on the_hms_stfu mentioned that this meeting of minds had indeed become a wankfest. So I took a look today, and here are the highlights.

There are a few threads in the forum. I'm going to c&p some of my favourite posts and exchanges, but there's other stuff for the brave websurfer. I'm also making an effort to keep it to wankery. I hold a very strong opinion that stupid shipping arguments are not necessarily wank. Wank is flame-wars, plagiarism, invocations of God, Godwin's law, comparisons to slavery, drama, etc. not dumb opinions of a fictional character.

The nastiest thread by far is The Origins of H/G: Baseless Popularity: How Did it gain such a fan base?

Actually, considering it's H/G they're discussing, I'm surprised at how long they stay civil. About one page, I think.

By page two,

Lex:
Huh? Are you suggesting it is my duty to understand Herons and Chocolateers? That somehow if it happens that there are more of them I should make some additional effort or give their position more weight? I am sorry but no. If they would like me to see their ship as they see it well first of all I'd need a lobotomy, and then well then it won't matter anyway.

Lex gets reprimanded by the mods, so then decides it'd be a good idea to explain further.

The main reason for the strong reply in this case and thus the "lobotomy" reference was cause by your suggestions that I should put extra effort to try to understand H/G simply because those shippers appear to be more numerous. I really dislike it when people try to tell me what I should or shouldn't do, think or feel. The second reason I was harsh on H/G shippers was the attitude the majority of them tend to have about their ship. From my encounters with H/G shippers it seems that the main argument toward their ship was entitlement. Ginny had a crush on Harry so he must like her back. Not only is it an unrealistic but it is also an unhealthy view of relationships. Its the same as some girl going to a rock concert and "falling in love" with the singer. It makes no sense.

Mystic Knight is there to back this up.

The term: "I am, therefore, I deserve" tends to cross my mind regarding the H/G pairing. Especially in regards to H/G shippers. I have to agree.



The H/G ship is nothing but a patsy ship for R/Hr shippers. Of course, that is just my opinion.

thereader then weighs in with his expert literary opinion.

It is up to the author to try to make all his or her readers see what she wants them to see, if she is unable to do so, then the problem lies with her, not with the readers concerned.

ALL? ALL?

Principessa:
Slightly, slightly OT: but I think that's impossible. No author can write something that everyone will interpret the same way, because everyone has different experiences. I'd imagine that Ms Rowling realizes this, but she most likely thinks that most people do see what she wants them to see.

Time for literary comparison.

remuslover:
I think to a degree you are right that not everyone will interpret something the same way, BUT, the author has to be able to evoke emotions with their writing to the genere in which they are writing. King is critically acclaimed because he successfully evokes and conveys the emotion of suspense, fear, and/or terror to ALL his readers. Writers like Poe, Hugo, Cervantes, Dante, Austen, ect were successful because they were able to convey and evoke emotions universally of dread, misery, whimsy, comedy, and romance respectively. If a decent percentage of JKR readership did not feel the right emotions then it is not fault of the reader but of the author.

thereader responds to Principessa.

thereader:
Whilst I agree that no writer can write something that everyone will interpret the same way, I disagree with this statement when it comes to Ginny, because there was nothing at all that makes me see her in a sympathetic light from book one. It's not only about interpretation, it's also about emotional involvement and I've rarely seen an (established) author do so little to make the protag's love interest palatable to her readers. If she thinks that that most people do see what she wants them to see, then she is largely off base, because the majority of the people in RL, I know, that have read HP, have not much sympathy for Ginny - the only ones that do are her fans.

Kalypsi resonds to remuslover's adualtion of Stephen King.

Kalypsi:
King evoked boredom when I tried to read his books, not fear. I know he tried to provoke fear and suspense, but he failed miserably with me, so the idea that he is successful with "ALL his readers" isn't really true. I don't think that's Kings fault at all, though. He and I just differ, and his writing doesn't work for me. Rowling's writing of Ginny didn't work for you, though I suspect it worked for the majority (and the majority are not online nutcases like us. And no, asking our offline friends won't be representative.) Rowling should be able to make the majority feel that way, but she has no responsibility to. She is ultimately writing for herself.

A few posts on, thereader comes back and contributes this contradictory post.

thereader:
Unfortunately. your response is to my post in which I clearly stated how I viewed her as a reader. This is important, because the love interest of the leading character must be someone that readers must be emotionally invested in.

I'm not talking about the entire fanbase. I'm talking about how I, as a reader (and others like me, but this is secondary) felt about her. Please get this clear that I do not give a d**n about the entire fanbase, only my own perceptions.

Then they get talking about hippogriffs.

Nathaniel:
The Hippogriff thing was not funny, but rather sick, really.

Many think it's our delusional minds, but we Harmonians took that personally, because we came up with the Hippogiff symbolism and everything and about what a Hyppogriff represents in mythology. We have very, very good reasons to believe that JKR pulled the Hyppogriff stunts (changing his name to Witherwings, the tatoo comment, etc.) to laugh at us, because she, like Emerson and Melissa, obviously believes that we are delusional

and later

Logically and Emotionally H/Hr would be perfect for each other, especially because we had hoped that Love truly was the Power the Dark Lord Knows Not, and that the only love strong enough in the series (as far as romantic love goes) that could, in fact, defeat Voldemort, was the love that we believed was between Harry and Hermione. Apparently, the Power the Dark Lord Knows Not is actually a combination of family love, testosterone, libido, and lust. Our mistake.

The Hippogriff challenge is then taken up.

BBBBB02963:
I'm sorry, but I think this is your delusional mind too, that JKR put that in just to spite all the H/Hrs. And 'Witherwings' probably refers to the horse parts (?) known as withers (no, I'm not an equestrian).

Nathaniel:
Go read our symbolism essays. She laughed at us and stomped on us in the interview, and with what she was saying, whose to say she wasn't laughing at us beforehand (like in her books, for example). Do I need to do another essay showing the many ways JKR kicked us in the head from HBP onward, now? Fine, I'll add that to my list.



Nathaniel:
Family love is great, friendship love is great, but the strongest love that exists in the world is pure romantic love. We start with family love, we have our friends, but in the end, when it comes to love, it is the love we have for a person we want to share the rest of our lives with that keeps us going. That is the strongest love, and that's what was there, for me, anyways, between Harry and Hermione.

Lust... yeah sure, but not if that's the only thing the relationship is built on. And I'm sorry, but H/G is not built on anything else. It simply is not, and in my many readings of the first five books, and even in my reading of the sixth book, there was absoluely no evidence to me that pointed itself to the contrary. The love between H/G is purely lust, and that's all.

And a relationship cannot exist on lust alone. As a matter of fact, the best way, IMO, to start a relationship is to start by being platonic friends. My last girlfriend and I started as purely platonic friends, and we ended up together for two years before she left for college. Lust should be an after-product really. It needs to be there, but can be built through time as the relationship progresses. Lust is not the first thing you need, nor can a relationship survive solely on lust alone. H/G has nothing but lust, and, as I said before, there is absolutely nothing in the books to suggest otherwise. So, I say again, these books truly are shallow and empty, because The Power the Dark Lord Knows Not is a combination of testosterone, libido, and lust.

As Harmonians, we had expected more, but I guess we are delusional for wanted to read about Real Love in a world where it obviously no longer exists...


My new HP slogan-

The Power the Dark Lord Knows Not:
SEX! (Love is just a euphemism for it)

Okaaay.

Kalypsi:
Just confirming this for everyone. I rode for twelve years and then got myself trained in farrier (horseshoeing) work, which makes me very familiar with ... anvils, aha, joking. I'm familiar with horses, and you are correct, the withers are the highest point of a horse at the shoulders. I think that it's used for dogs, too. The wings on a hippogriff would attach somewhere around there, so it makes sense. I think, at least, that it makes more sense than Rowling having a vendetta against H/Hr.

Then comes my favourite post.

Dark Rune:
For those toying with the possibility that this may be true, just step back for a moment, and logically consider the situation, the spiteful act from which you're trying to excuse Rowling.

She renamed Buckbeak. Out of all the names she could have chosen, she re-christened him WITHERwings.

Although I don't subscribe to it personally, the hippogriff symbolism is one of the most widely spread Harmonian theories in fandom. Rowling would have been blind not to run across this theory if she so much as skims the ship wars, which she claims she enjoys.

So is WITHERwings a mere coincidence? No. Way.

I'll make two points:

1. The strongest, most immediate meaning conveyed by the word "wither" to all of Rowling's English readership is not an obscure part of an animal's anatomy. You cannot assume that's how most readers, if any, will interpret that word. The commonly understood, dictionary definition of "wither" is "to dry up" or "to shrivel". Thus, there is no mistaking the intended meaning of Witherwings (hello anvils!).

Rowling probably patted herself on the back for her "cunning" in choosing a name that not only disses H/Hr's symbolic theories, but vaguely relates to the creature itself. Moreover, the word describing that part of a horse is "withers", not "wither", further disproving the notion that Rowling gives a hoot about equine anatomy.

2. But wait! Aren't Harmonians always talking about reading between the lines? What about the hotly debated, deeper meaning of the word "platonic"?

Well, for one thing, during the Interview, Rowling informs us that everything we need to know is already on the surface. Obvious. Anvil-sized. No analytical thinking required. So let's go with the obvious meaning of the "platonic", shall we? Therefore, for us to pick on a tiny detail like the meaning of "Witherwings" is exactly that: nitpicking.

"Platonic" actually has a more significant, more beautiful meaning that transcends people's base perceptions, and it was a meaning worth exploring. Back in its day, "platonic" affected the ship war directly, but in the post-interview world, Witherwings does not matter.

In the end, it is just an insidious jab at H/Hr fandom. It goes undetected by most readers except for those it was intended to hurt, and hurt it did.

Sorry, but despite your attempts to excuse her, Rowling remains a malicious, spiteful author. With so many blatant references to fandom ("Rupert", Remus/Tonks, Hermione "punching" Malfoy), how can anyone even argue that "Witherwings" was an innocent coincidence?

Woops. Clumsy Rowling.

I'll leave off with that post, though the discussion is continuing and short of JKR using her special forces operatives to take out the forum will certainly produce many more laugh-out-loud exchanges.

One final note. Rule 21 of Portkey is 21) Post, images, etc., which contain or promote "Slash" (teacher/pupil, animal/human, incest, etc.) relationships are not allowed. Members who post such content will receive a warning.

BBBBB02963 wins the internet with this sig throughout the thread:
As per Rule 21 of this board, my slash 'ship of choice is not teacher/pupil, animal/human, or incestuous, but rather Hermione/Ginny.

ETA. vanceone shows up on FW to protest. He's wrong about the community being f-locked, though. Membership is entirely open.

ETA II. vanceone writes a response to this post</a> on his community hmsgetalife.