The HMS STFU

Snapefen abuse Calvinism again

2008-11-22T10:31:41Z

snapedom never fails to bring the lulz.

severed_lies made this post here:

The Punishment of Severus Snape

Most of us would agree, Severus Snape must have been the busiest man in the Wizarding World.

I have been thinking about Severus and how he came to be Head of Slytherin House. I cannot remember any reference as to when Severus was given the Head of House position, so I will assume it was part of the 'deal' made between Dumbledore and Severus to bring him to Hogwarts as a staff member/spy.

I believe that Dumbledore most certainly wanted Severus under his thumb, he wanted to completely control every aspect of his life. What I cannot fathom is giving a damaged young man the horrible task of spying on Voldemort while maintaining a Professor's responsibilities, possibly brewing potions for the infirmary and being Head of the most complex and demanding House.

Surely, I thought, Jo was underestimating how many hours each day all those duties would consume, leaving no time for the Severus to sleep. If it is simply a plot hole, and she did not bother to calculate how much the poor man was expected to accomplish each day during the school year, then I could dismiss it without further thought. But given just how explicitly she described Severus' return to Hogwarts, and the extreme reaction Dumbledore had to Severus' confession, then the burdens that she had Severus take on become somewhat clearer.

Much has been said about the Calvinistic theme permeating the series. The phrase 'no rest for the wicked' comes to mind when you examine Severus' life. I wondered if this over-burdening of Severus might be construed as punishment. Really severe and inhumane punishment. Punishment that satisfies some notion (much discussed) that no matter what Severus does, it counts for naught, and his redemption is not only impossible, but he must also work tirelessly and without praise or assistance. Considering Severus' entire life seems to have followed this pattern, I have come to feel that it must have been intentional on the part of the author.

So, Severus' life in review: His youth a morass of humiliation and abuse. His teaching career a never-ending series of impossible expectations. His spying career a labyrinth of pain and deception, with a side order of constant fear. And finally, a devil's snare of protecting Draco, being Dumbledore's executioner, and protector of Hogwarts during that final, brutal year. His only reward for enduring such a miserable life was an early death, a release which cost him not only his blood, but his dignity and his privacy.

More and more, I must conclude that Severus' creator purposely choose to punish the character, from the cradle to the grave, without respite or relief.

It makes my heart ache.

There is much fail in comments too.

Jo speaks about fan entitlement.

2008-11-21T14:25:48Z

JKR has spoken to Melissa about fan entitlement. With mentions of shipping and characters!

JKR: The moment that Emerson said what he said [in the 2005 interview], on tape, I knew.
...

The fallout touched me, as well as Emerson. I had some pretty nasty letters but, you know, by that time I'd become used to the fact that people were so invested in this world, and felt such ownership of this world that I was not on a pedestal at all in their eyes, I was right in the thick of the fight. And it's uncomfortable on and off the pedestal, so you get used to it."

MA: You even joked about a shipper leading Emerson down a dark hallway.

[Laughing] Well yeah! I mean, he's totally unapologetic. Emerson enjoys a good fight. I'm not someone who goes looking for a fight, but I am someone who, if a fight comes to me, I will not duck it. So, if people want information on my characters, then they have to accept that I'm going to give them the information on the characters. And if they don't like it, that's the nature of fiction. You have to accept someone else's world because they made that world, so they probably know a little better than you do what goes on there.

I was not at all new to the concept of fan entitlement because that had now been going on since, I think, around 1999. As the Snape Debate hotted up, I would occasionally receive mail from fans that was instructing me on my characters. And you know what, that's very endearing when it comes from a younger person, and it's less endearing when it comes from an older person.

Do you know, it may have even been earlier. I remember getting a letter in the late 1990s, from an American woman who had heard me say on the radio when I had been in the States that I think it is a lie not to allow my characters, as they are plainly getting a year older with every book, not to allow my characters some sexual feelings. Although a fantasy series is not, I think, really the place, to explore issues of, for instance, the use of hard drugs or teenage pregnancy. To be ramming those social messages down people's throats when there are other social messages within the Harry Potter books, felt incongruous. But still, it was unrealistic that Harry was going to proceed from the age of 11 to the age of 17 never having kissed a girl, never having had any kind of romantic feelings towards girls, is as much as I said on this radio program. That was probably the first evidence I had, of that kind of fan entitlement: a very vehement letter from a mother saying, "Do not do this. I want your books as a refuge for my children, as a place of innocence and security." And I felt, well, listen: this series started with the knowledge of a double murder. I never promised that this a world of innocence and security. Quite the reverse. I announced it as a world of danger and corruption. So, probably, that was my very first introduction.

MA: The shipping debacle was...something else.

JKR: Did you get touched by that?

MA: I came out least scathed. I got touched, though; some people said some pretty vicious things.

JKR: You know what? I kind of got an overview of that, because right after we met, we went on holiday, and I came back to snail mail about it and you know what? You can normally tell by the snail mail what must have gone on online.

It is unhealthy for me to go online too much. I'm very aware that you could spend your life reading message boards, and that's a very unhealthy place to go. So I'm really quite sparing in how often I go and look. But just from what I had in front of me - and from fans saying to me "Please don't take to heart too much what was on the message boards!" [Laughter] So, you know, I knew what really must have happened on the message boards.

MA: Emerson got compared to a slave owner!

JKR: Oh, it's just ludicrous. I had a letter from a grown man, a very articulate letter, who said, "Well, pardon me for thinking that you're a better writer than you are." That's literally what he said. "I assumed you were giving us subtle hints about Harry and Hermione, but no. Turned out you were being really crass and obvious." What are you going to do? This is what I mean by 'slightly less endearing.' [Laughter]

MA: If that's slightly less endearing, I wonder what very less endearing is...

JKR: Yeah. We could go there, but I don't know.

MA: I don't think we have that kind of time.

It seems many of the wankers have learned how to lock their wank (finally) but we can hope that this may generate some interesting responses :D

http://harryahistory.com/2008/11/vault-6-on-harryhermione-shipp.html

the_hms_stfu @ 2008-11-12T20:58:00

2008-11-12T17:58:48Z

The "analysis" of the Marauders from Rattlesnakeroot and Co.

From Development of Snape's Character Through DH:

"Silver Ink Pot

In the past, JKR has said that she found Sirius "sexy," but I never got that idea from the book. A man who wears prison rags and eats rats is not sexy to me. The fact that Harry thinks Sirius is handsome doesn't persuade me either, because Sirius says and does some really stupid things. Intelligence is sexy to me, and Sirius is a bit lacking in that department.

Later JKR backtracked and said Sirius has some "glaring flaws." She mentioned the way he treated Snape and Kreacher, but she never called him a bully, and I would. Many of us think he and James come out looking worse than ever in Book 7, but JKR will probably never come out and call them bullies, and that's her own problem."

From Snape's Journey - the concept of "The Hero's Journey" applied to Severus Snape:

"subtle science

Well done!

Snape is the 'hidden hero' of HP....That literary (or cinematic) convention of the character who appears to be the antithesis of the hero, yet who is revealed to be a tower of moral strength, inspiration, and courage: all that Snape is, openly, by the end of DH. But it's key to Harry's own journey that he doesn't see that for all of Snape's life--the six years that Harry knows.

Random thought....A cauldron is kind of a type of crucible--something that purifies, tempers, and transforms through heat. Failures to complete the process result in useless products, some even potentially dangerous, most noxious. I can't help it....it just makes me think of the Marauders: when tested, none of them truly succeed: Pettigrew is an abject failure, obviously, but the others fizzle; there is no transformation, there is no becoming someone transcendentally better. Lupin is the best that can be offered--and his is the equivalent of a whimper. The one who does something and achieves is Snape. And he doesn't have to be anything more (or less) than an ordinary human in order to do it."

"Nyctalus

I agree that none of the Marauders is seen in complete transformation (except for physically when they turn into werewolf and animaguses); they're all stuck in the same way of thinking and behaviour as when they were young. Come to think of it, Voldemort is also “reborn” from a cauldron, but in his case there isn't any transformation at all; he's exactly the same cruel person he was when the AK spell backfired on himself. I think it's significative that it's not the Potions Master who brews the Potion to restore Voldemort, but a Marauder."

"hwyla

Interesting point Nyc about animagi and werewolf transformations - with both the human becomes an animal - supposedly a step down on the food chain (unless it's a werewolf doing the eating). So it's almost like transforming to a LOWER level instead of transforming upwards and improving your character.

And from what we can tell of the Marauders, they are more or less stuck as their 5th year selves (dependent upon whether James actually ever DID change or not).

Sirius still believes he was right to send Snape down the werewolf hole and he still cannot abide boredom (and probably self-reflection).

Remus still had trouble speaking out against what his friends wanted him to do (exception being what Tonks wanted which I find difficult to understand - are we supposed to believe he was finally taking a stand against what he thought was wrong - or is it some kind of Marauder loyalty to not get too close to outsiders?)

Peter is still toadying to a more powerful 'protector' with a bit of glee thrown in for watching other hurt instead of himself. Altho' at least he hesitates to cut Harry in bk4 and over the Life debt in bk7.

But it's as if their transformation to animga is the point that locks their transformation as humans. Remus' werewolf transformation was earlier - but the animagi change of the others locks his change as well."

"hwyla

Quote from: ignisia on August 31, 2008, 08:19:02 PM
....Before Tonks, his loyalty to the Marauders colors an unfortunately large portion of his decisions. After Tonks, her ideas are the ones he adopts, for better or for worse.

And 'between' he is influenced by the Weasleys (Molly in particular). For a short while there I saw him as beginning to develop a backbone - especially when he won't let Molly influence his decision about Tonks - and shown most in Harry's birthday at the Weasleys - when he keeps bringing up the missing folks from Diagon Alley - much to Molly's chagrin.

Yet I cannot cheer that bit because it takes away from Harry's first real birthday - so it diminishes someone else to push his growth forward. And I don't know exactly how to take Tonks. They either have a falling apart just as Sirius died or there really had been nothing before then with Tonks somehow getting the idea that she could be his new pack. I've always kind of hoped they had a relationship in bk5 that we just weren't really aware of. I hope Tonks didn't just push herself on him - that Remus HAD accepted her in some form before Sirius' death

But IF so, then it means the death of Sirius affected his decision about Tonks. Which is interesting since the death of Albus then also affects it - just towards a different direction. Almost as if Remus refuses Tonks because Sirius was the kind of guy who wouldn't want to be tied down, but then accepts her because Albus always supported 'love' (at least in words)

So - Tonks is both Temptress and Marriage (#8 & #7 on Bluestocking's essay)

----
Thought on Snape for these to subjects = Lily is his Temptress and Marriage as well

With his calling her mudblood being something of a refusal (even tho' he does apologize) and then his turning to Albus to protect her as the marriage (even tho' she is unaware of it) and then continued with his promise to protect her son."

"Aluna

And this "boon" that Snape "bestowed to his fellow man" is nothing less than the lesson of ultimate humanity... "Expelliarmus" is about "expelling" all weapons and aggression, about learning to defend oneself without ever offending - which is how Harry achieves victory over Voldemort at the end. It is such a crucial spell in the books, and not just when Harry uses it: in HBP, it's Draco who casts it, thus changing fatefully the course of future events and allowing Harry to be successful at his own Expelliarmus when he faces Voldemort. But Draco wouldn't have used the spell if he was intent on killing Dumbledore, I believe. Just as he was able to take the headmaster by surprise and disarm him, he would have been able to kill him in a fraction of the second -- but he didn't... Expelliarmus thus showed Draco's more compassionate streak, just like it has Harry's, time and again.

Expelliarmus is not a "Gryffindor" sort of spell: Snape taught it, Lupin objected to it, and whenever Snape tried to defend himself without fighting back, in HBP and DH, he got called a coward by the Gryffindors (Harry and McGonagall). That says a lot about the type of hero Snape is, about what constitutes courage, "nerve and daring"..."

From James Potter - The Debate Goes On and On…:

"Ariella

Woah, the vitrol in this thread is simply marvelous.

Nah. To be fair, I honestly don't hate James, the way everyone else seems to- How can I hate a character with so little development and page time? I truly can't hate him the way I hate, say, Sirius, because I don't know anything about him beyond the fact that he was a pampered bully- he's two-dimensional and dislikable to me, but I'm not invested in him enough to feel anything beyond negative indifference towards him.

What annoys me about James is that Rowling gave him everything- she gave him good looks, "charm," riches, high social status, immense popularity, oodles of academic and athletic talent, adoring parents, and the prettiest girl in school to boot. James got everything he ever wanted without lifting a finger; he got everything just dropped in his lap and no matter how awfully he treated people, everyone of "importance" still adored him and catered to him, even after he died. Yes, he died at 21, but he died a "tragic martyr" and got a memorial in Godric's Hollow and an immortalized statue. He'll always be remembered in the WW as a wonderful, heroic man who was a victim of betrayal-- James never had to face people disliking him, he never had to face real difficulty in his life, never had to face anything but Lily's "I-like-you-but-I'll-play-hard-to-get" rejection. His life was half as long as Sev's but millions and millions times better, and that just ticks me off-- because Sev worked so hard and did so much for the tiniest bit of self-peace and James did nothing but got everything in life.

JK Rowling's interviews on James are rather amusing, I must say. She obviously wants her readers to like James (The way she wants her readers to dislike Sev - hahaha!), but none of them do; really, from what I've seen in the fandom, if you did a mass "Least Favorite Character" Poll, James would beat out everyone else without a doubt. No one likes him; even Ben Schoen thinks he's a jerk! Perhaps that's why I don't hate James the way I hate Sirius (Whose immense popularity I will NEVER understand-- I'm convinced that his gang of devoted followers has far more to do with his sexy looks/motorcycle that with the person he actually is, which is something I've noticed on other sites-- the Snapenistas are all mostly older women, and the Sirius fangirls are teenagers), because he's so unpopular on his own merits (Is that petty? Maybe it is) that I just don't care much about him."

From Harry Potter and the Vampire Slayer:

"Nyctalus

Quote
but early on in the series, she also presented a disjoint between her claims about her characters and what appeared on the page. The classic one that struck me hardest was her statement that Sirius was sexy: I can't abide abusive men, and so this view of Sirius was repugnant and really glaring to me, as it strongly showed the contrast between JKR's impression of the character and the one shown in the books--arrogant, self absorbed, violent, egotistical, and bullying. That he was once supposed to be handsome did not automatically make him sexy....
I see that comment from JKR as almost a bit 'Lupinesque', as if she would like to be on good terms with those young admirers of her story, who might find this character superficially 'cool' with his motorbike, his rough appearance, his cruel jokes, his barking laugh and his 'casual' behavior... But those kinds of statements also make me reflect upon the deeper meaning of the word. To me, Sirius fulfills nothing of it; he isn't even very exciting in that sense...

Isn't it interesting that the author puts these Marauder characters in her books as protagonists in situations of abuse, hubris, idiocy and even murder. But still they are 'iconized' - both within the books with appreciating comments, statues and shining images in Harry's mind and outside them in the author's statements... James is described as "arrogant" more than once by Lily, but then she marries him without very much explanation. Like in real life, people's view of these matters are very varied, and I have certainly realized that the author doesn't share my views of what makes someone 'sexy'...

Sirius may be described by Harry as innocent, but Dumbledore's words in PoA are very telling: "Sirius hasn't behaved like an innocent man"...

"subtle science

I agree that the Marauders are the more tragic figures of HP. The only thing that happens to Snape is that he dies....the fact of death is sad, in and of itself. However, Snape lived a life of purpose and meaning; his life was one of personal accomplishment and development, and he turned his own personal reformation into a powerful force of help and support. It was not necessary that he be perfect--only gods are perfect....What mattered was what his life achieved.

That recalls a previous discussion we've had, about the concept of a 'good' death. That was Snape's. Any death leaves the sense of regret that more could've been done and was still to do--but this can be tempered if something was accomplished, that could be pointed to proudly. There is very little of that in the Marauders' lives....and deaths. What they accomplished was very, very minor, and largely superficial....In sad fact--it's Pettigrew who accomplishes the most, all in the cause of evil........All of the Marauder deaths are accompanied by the sense of wasted lives, further cut short--potential that went nowhere. There is more reason for grief in their cases, because they ended up as merely pathetic figures."

"subtle science

I think that the best summary of the Marauders and their failure ever to grow up was the chapter "Career Advice" in OotP....The reactions from Lupin and Sirius when Harry asks them about SWM reveal all that need be said about their characters: deny, divert, and justify. Neither demonstrates the slightest insight into himself--any scrap of awareness and learning; it isn't that they committed odious acts....It's that there is no true remorse and no change from what they were when they perpetrated the acts.

It's the dividing line between them and Snape. The themes of forgiveness and redemption are the major underpinnings of BVS, HP, and TW: the messages of all three are the same--there is no act so heinous that it cannot be forgiven. There is only one catch: the one to be forgiven must be truly, wholly remorseful. Sirius and Lupin remain despicable because they cannot accept their own culpability. And they d*mn James as well with their self justification, a view confirmed by the scraps of information in DH.

The portrayal is complex, because none of them--except Pettigrew--could be called truly evil. Yet none of them are good, either: they illustrate, sad to say, a very typical sort of person, who behaves cruelly and simply sets aside his/her behavior as justified, or just the product of being immature (which the person making the excuses remains), or insignificant--the latter to him/her, not to the nonentity whom he/she has harmed....

It's an interesting side effect that none of the Marauders were able to cope effectively with the difficulties of adult life. They were ill-equipped to handle consequences, as they expected the lucky escapes, the excuses, etc.

It's also interesting to see how Lupin and Sirius react to Pettigrew, in PoA. Neither is interested in justice: what they both want is childish vengeance--immediate, extreme punishment, meted out immediately. It's understandable, to a degree: it's an emotional impulse, a first reaction. However, the problem is that the drive remains on that level--the impulsiveness that marks the behavior of the immature Lupin and Sirius. It's a part of the 'boo-boo effect': part of what makes things right again is the swift, even if unfair and unjust, punishment of those who have caused a boo-boo.

Adult logic applied to the situation would've resolved any number of issues: Pettigrew, turned over to proper justice, would also have been the proof of Sirius' innocence. Neither Lupin nor Sirius is capable of perceiving this glaringly obvious point; they are completely focused on the immediate gratification of their own revenge.

The point is driven home, wonderfully, with the contrast provided by Snape. His emotional response, desiring vengeance against the Marauders, is characterized, quite ironically, by Sirius and Lupin as being immature (and by far too many weak readers).....Yet it's Snape whose temper cools and who is able to see beyond his emotional impulses to what is right and adult--and who acts on it. Sirius and Lupin cannot and do not--even after the initial emotional carrying on, after they have pages of conversation....they go right back to their childish vengeance. Whether operating under the influence of extreme emotion or under calm control, they are incapable of acting like adults."

"Nyctalus

Quote from: subtle science
"Snape's Grudge" becomes understandable: it is extremely difficult to forgive anyone who is gleefully unrepentant. Perhaps it can serve some purpose for the injured party (not really an idea I adhere to); it certainly does nothing for and has nothing to do with the perpetrator's potential redemption.
I very much agree. In fact I don't see any obvious reasons for Snape to forgive neither Lupin nor Sirius. When Snape is asked to work together with Sirius, he does it, and he tries to stop him from going to the MoM after Harry. Snape also keeps brewing the Wolfsbane potion to Lupin and brings it to him personally, even after Lupin has deeply humiliated him in front of the students (Neville's boggart). Snape tries to hold back his "grudge" against them enough to keep doing the right thing, in spite of them showing absolutely no remorse towards him, all the contrary... To ask of Severus that he shall feel and show forgiveness towards these people, who haven't in any sense asked for it and who aren't even aware of their own sins, would be rather unrealistic in my opinion.

In Snape's case, I can't think of anything he would ever have done to Sirius and Lupin; they were bullying him, not the other way around, so he has no reason to feel responsible like Jack does towards Gray. The only decent conduct for the remaining Marauders would be to ask for Snape's forgiveness, but that never happens. (It would have been really interesting to see Snape's response in case they had actually shown him remorse - but that would, of course, be a completely different story, and not at all 'in character' for neither of these Marauder guys. Thus it would have craved a lot of extra pages to present their hypothetical story of transformation in order to make this believable.. ).

I actually think remorse was something so beyond Sirius that he couldn't even imagine it. When he learns that Snape has been a Death Eater and now sees him working for the 'good' side, the man isn't capable of reflecting upon how this change might have come around (and still, Sirius must have known that Lily had been Snape's friend and Voldemort had killed her). Instead he skips the logic and immediately jumps to the conclusion that he, Sirius, was right all along, thus not having to feel even an ounce of regret for his previous behavior.

Come to think of it, I believe Sirius' almost nonexistent capacity of regret is nicely shown in PoA. To his Godson, Sirius buys a luxury Firebolt. But Ron, a kid who was almost scared to death by Sirius showing up in front of his bed with a huge dagger, and whose leg Sirius then violently broke - what does Ron get from Sirius for compensation? An apology? No, he gets the tiniest possible owl Sirius could find, and it's not even an outright gift - it's just a messenger needed for Sirius to communicate with Harry. And Hermione, who together with Harry saved Sirius' life, gets absolutely nothing. No 'wizard's dept', there..."

"subtle science

Sirius is a perfect depiction of an utterly despicable type of person: he's self absorbed, convinced of his own superiority; he's superficial--although he's labeled intelligent, he never demonstrates it in the books: in fact, he shows contempt for any true intellectualism.

A few of JKR's comments while she was still in the process of writing the books indicated that she was quite fond of the character....There's a certain kind of irony in that, since she certainly did not depict anything about him that could explain that liking (except in the abstract manner of liking all of one's characters as creations); instead, the character was exceptionally off putting. To me, it's a fascinating subconscious psychological detail that Sirius is never paired off with a girl or woman, despite much fuss being made over his handsomeness....because he is, truly, the cliche of the Bad Boy. That phrase has been overused, to the point of losing its meaning. But, in real life, Sirius would be the type of man to whom women should/do give a wide berth--an egotist who's not quite as smart as he thinks he is, who knows that he is always right, who takes pleasure in putting others down and bullying, whose bullying intensifies exponentially when he doesn't get his way.....

Sirius' death is only sad because it has an impact on Harry; for Sirius himself--it only points up a wasted life and opportunity/potential that never developed, because Sirius himself was a classic case of arrested development--long before he ended up in Azkaban, too."

"Nyctalus

In Sirius' case, however, I don't think we are shown much reason for him to behave like he does, other than pure egoism. Even if I'm sure he wasn't happy at home and had serious conflicts with his family about the pureblood supremacy issue, he never strikes me as someone truly ready to fight for equality within the wizarding world, nor to save lives (like Owen). As a young boy, Sirius' behavior is haughty and arrogant even towards his supposed friends – except for the equally wealthy pureblood James – and he certainly doesn't seem to value Lupin's friendship too high, considering how he almost made him a murderer. And the adult Sirius acts just about the same way; an old bully who is now in an “inferior” situation but who still is ready to walk right over people to get his revenge or to get his point through...

At first sight (and with a very brief glimpse through Harry's eyes ), people can seem to be unfair to Sirius; Molly doesn't recognize him as a stand-in father for Harry referring to his time in jail, and Snape taunts him for “hiding at his mother's house”. But that's only after Sirius has already showed his bullying contempt for both of them and for everyone else with a different idea than Sirius about how to do things – including Dumbledore. And even if twelve years of despair with the Dementors in Azkaban is an entirely inhumane fate for anyone, I think it's undeniable that Sirius got there on his own account in the first place, for a murder he was surely ready to commit, although Wormtail happened to be quicker. And Sirius wouldn't have had to stay put in his house for so long if he hadn't stupidly blown his cover in front of Lucius Malfoy...

Quote
To me, it's a fascinating subconscious psychological detail that Sirius is never paired off with a girl or woman, despite much fuss being made over his handsomeness....because he is, truly, the cliche of the Bad Boy.

It's interesting indeed. In fact, I can't recall any of the females in the story paying Sirius any kind of attention at all, except perhaps for that girl at his DADA exam. But after that, there is no one; not Lily, not Tonks or any other female Order member, certainly not Molly. Hermione probably only helps him because of what he means to Harry, but she can't stand his egotism. In the books Sirius appears really off-putting to any female, so I have problems understanding how he can have such a large fan-base. It's also kind of ironic that he gets killed by his own female cousin..."

"subtle science

What is seen of Sirius in the books fully supports the idea of someone who is easily and frequently bored--and basically incapable of generating a distracting interest for himself of any useful sort. OotP really portrayed him as quite the whiner: his reaction to being stuck in the house was simply to have a temper tantrum; not only did he do nothing useful for the Order--he proceeded to undermine the Order, because he was in a snit.

Sirius is just a superficial character--a depiction of a very superficial type of person....It's actually an extremely deft portrayal, because he's thoroughly grating and off putting, just as any immature spoiled brat in an adult's body is.

It's interesting that, in BVS, the spoiled brats are treated as objects of mockery...Cordelia's band of bullies is the butt of jokes. Cordelia herself is rehabbed--at first, she is cruel and wholly self absorbed and superficial, full of a sense of entitlement. Unlike in HP, with Sirius, she is clearly presented as a type to laugh at for her inflated sense of self-importance. Unlike Sirius, also, is the slow development of her character, as she learns to become a real adult and a real human being. In contrast, her cohort, Harmony, is always the joke of a villain in the series--because she never grows up and stays the same egotistical b*tch.

TW tends to lack characters with a sense of entitlement like Sirius and Harmony. The closest is the doctor who runs the Pharm in "Reset"...and Jack--affable Jack who can make a friend of anyone--regards him with icy contempt; their confrontation is one of the very, very rare moments in TW when Jack draws full attention to the extent of his power. Barrowman--as he did in "Countrycide," too, when he caught one of the cannibals--perfectly captures the dangerous side of Jack, when the dazzling smile becomes bared teeth. "Fragments" also gives a touch of this--Jack's reaction to the Victorian TW's misuse of power.

TW's characters would be incomprehensible to Sirius: people who are willing to sacrifice themselves for a greater good, using their wits as much or more than brute force to try to keep others (no matter who those people are) safe--knowing, all the time, that TW members tend to die young, in the line of this duty. Snape, on the other hand, would fit right in."

"Nyctalus

Another thing that Sirius just doesn't do is trying to get close to Harry. Sirius seems unable to fathom what he means to Harry, that he in many ways is as close to a father as Harry can get. But in spite of him publicly wanting to decide what Harry is allowed to know and what not, Sirius has no inkling of how a father is supposed to behave.

He must be aware of what this boy is facing though, at least part of it, and I can't imagine he doesn't know anything about Harry's upbringing - at least he knows perfectly well how Lily felt about her sister, considering the letter she sent him shortly before getting killed... Sirius also knows Harry is ready to come and live with him, Sirius - a runaway convict who he doesn't even know - rather than staying at home with his relatives. Sirius is said to care for Harry, and maybe he does in his own way, but considering the responsibility he supposedly does have, what he shows is really minuscule. At best, he treats Harry like another Order member and he doesn't really show much interest for Harry's problems, which he immediately compares and finds less severe than his own."

Godwin's Wank

2008-11-07T00:20:59Z

Some more comments from Tea at Spinner's End:

"fool4luv - Jul 29, 2007 5:07 pm (#436 of 1240)
No, I'm getting defenders.. what it horrifyingly turned into into people saying, "Jews aren't like that at all! I'm Jewish and I don't have a hooked nose!"

Syd, I brought up the subject with a young Jewish woman at work today and she had the same reaction, she wasn't at all offended by the goblin stereotypes because they're, like, goblin stereotypes, right? There are so many people who are ignorant of the meaning of the concept of "stereotype" and how it is employed. There is a lot of Jewish denial about antisemitism out there, and I admire the spirit behind it but it breaks my heart.

When I was a kid in the 1950s nobody drummed the lessons of the Holocaust into our heads, and I had friends who lost relatives in Europe. Whatever exclusivity there was broke down when a child teared up because she couldn't be with her friends, and consequently I spent most of my youth at the YM/YWHA. That won my loyalty the way no lectures ever could, but most people did not grow up in the same sort of city I did. And they aren't as gut-level mortified by the implications of Severus' "greedy" looks at Lily -- that's like a direct insult to at least one dear friend (to say nothing of Severus himself, for whom I grieve). What the hell sort of atmosphere has this woman lived in all her life that she can blithely write such garbage?

The second objection, "they can't represent Jews, because they represent Nazis", would make sense if not for the chilling reality that, especially in other parts of the world, Jews are increasingly being equated with Nazis for the purpose of manipulating attitudes. (If anyone would like an example of real "Dark Magic", one of its defining qualities is that things are not what they seem, reality is mutable, a tool to be manipulated to gain control of others. Snape had it right on the money.) I don't believe Rowling consciously and deliberately employed any of this, but it is part of the society in which she moves and at this point there is no question in my mind that she has absorbed some of it.

But even if there was no recognizable stereotype, the simple fact that a group is described as being evil as a whole and practically from birth is revolting enough.

Doesn't Rowling have a major interview or live Q&A coming up? How will she handle it if some kid asks her if she really thinks Slytherins are inherently bad. (No, Jo, "probably the bravest man I ever knew" does not cut it. What has little "Al" been hearing all his young life that makes him so terrified of being sorted into Slytherin? Harry never mentioned the "bravest man" before, I take it?) She has denied them even the right to grieve -- all the Slytherin kids fled the scene or were fighting for the DEs, and Snape is not carried in to lie with the other defenders, and Slughorn is not likely to be someone most of these young fans will identify with."

"fool4luv - Jul 30, 2007 6:36 am (#443 of 1240)
Edit: Tangentially, this reminds me of what Clint Eastwood did - with Flags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima. In other words, I'd love someone to demand that *Rowling* write the whole story from the Slytherin point of view, under the *assumption* that Slytherins are "our guys".

There have actually been some good fics from the Slytherin POV, such as "Sticks and Stones". But they mostly deal with stuff like the favoritism shown to Gryffindor, and they don't have the overlay of Inherent Evil that we're trying to grapple with.

I'd wondered if Eastwood would have tried that with a battle seen from the Allied and the Nazi POVs. The Empire of Japan does not carry the same stigma, at least not at this time and in this part of the world. However, your point about demonization is well taken. The "Born Evil vibes" are the most disturbing element of all. The question is, just what is Rowling demonizing via the Slytherins and why has she virtually closed the door to the possibility of reconciliation? And closed it on children, at that? The house is characterized at various times by Dumbledore and the Hat as attracting those with ambition, resourcefulness, determination, and cunning. What is inherently wrong with these qualities? If the House is supposed to attract the inherently evil, why aren't its characteristics listed as cruelty, dishonesty, maliciousness and bigotry? Why are so many Slytherins brutish lumps lacking in the better qualities they are alleged to possess? (Of course, wtf was Wormtail doing in Gryffindor?) And how did this crew of dunderheads manage to win the House Cup 6 years running? Nothing's together on this thing.

JKR says: "It was deliberate. Snape had effectively abandoned his post before dying, so he had not merited inclusion in these august circles."

Abandoned his post?!? The man had been revealed as a dedicated spy for the Order in public by Harry Potter, and he's accused of having abandoned his post? After he had bailed out the window to avoid having to injure Hogwarts faculty and students and then died in the "line of duty"? If Harry vouched for him and Albus' portrait did the same, what is the problem here? Surely she's not suggesting that Dumbledore bad-mouthed the poor man from beyond the grave.....

Of course, now that I'm kind of bitter about the book, it seems only to encourage this kind of divisiveness and side-picking.

I'm sitting here actually shivering. I can hardly bear to pick up the damn book now and I'm "escaping" into Anne Perry novels, what does that tell you? Maybe it's because I've been monitoring this topic elsewhere and it's such a shock to have it leap out at me from the "safety" of the Potterverse. Her dehumanizing treatment of Snape feels like a slap in the face. I cannot understand where the primal hatred for this man comes from on Rowling's part. Who does he represent in her mind? It can't be that chemist her mother worked for and if she is taking our her resentment on her mean ol' grade school teachers the girl needs to invest a few of her millions in therapy.

Sphinx, I wonder if she has received any other questions along this line and if she will choose to deal with the subject and defend herself, although she would probably say the used the stereotypes to illustrate the evils of stereotypes, which rather misses the point when she turns around and abuses the people she is stereotyping. I know much of this has to be unconscious, I just can't believe it is deliberate."

"sydpad - Jul 30, 2007 7:05 am (#445 of 1240)

I do not associate this with anti-Semitism, almost - uh, at a loss for a word here: subconsciously? automatically? the way some of you seem to. It is a very abhorrent conclusion to a book the way it is, but I see no connection with anti-Semitism, in particular.

THANK YOU. I just want to have a calm, rational discussion about this, without people calling each other crazy or racist or whatever! It really is now-you-see-it, now-you-don't, at least for me. A lot of it, as you say, just seems the inevitable imagery you'd use for an enemy-within type Other. I mean, it's not like there's a really *nice* tradition of stories along those lines.

Two things pushed it over the edge for me in DH-- well, aside from the whole ending, which just went through the series with a baseball bat, as far as I'm concerned. It was the tear going down Snape's hooked nose, which was all kinds of Fagin, tied in with the greedy expressions and the general 'ewww' we were supposed to feel about his feelings. The other thing-- and this for me is the big one-- is the Christ-killer thing. As soon as Harry became explicitly a Christ figure, and you had Pansy and the Slytherins in their 'give us Barabas' moment, it turned into something that was so peripheral as to be totally not there unless you wanted to see it, to something.. uh... yeah. It was making me uncomfortable right there as I was reading the book, especially as those two images came right after one another."

"Bluestocking - Jul 30, 2007 8:51 am (#449 of 1240)

But no one can bear to play him as the monster Shakespeare was trying to create. His humanity shines all the more brightly the more Shakespeare tries to vilify him.

Absolutely. I think that's why I see Snape as more Shylock than Fagin, simply because authorial sadism only makes the character appear better, rather than worse. Most modern productions shift the focus to the tragedy of Shylock, with the troubles of Antonio, Bassanio, Portia et.al. of lesser importance. Besides, doesn't Snape want his 'pound of flesh' from those who have tormented him?

He comes to a bad end in Oliver Twist, but people don't tend to remember that as much as they remember his vitality and cunning.

Interestingly, when Oliver Twist was adapted into a musical, the adapter pitched the original offensive ending wholesale. The musical ends with Fagin escaping into the night, living to fight another day. I was in a production of 'Oliver' a few years ago (I played Nancy), and can vouch for the fact that our Fagin was far more popular with the audience than Oliver was."

"fool4luv - Jul 30, 2007 2:04 pm (#458 of 1240)
Edited by Jul 30, 2007 3:11 pm
I get the impression that for JKR Snape is the same despicable character from Snivellus to the end, but he was overtaken and moved by Lily's Grace. His good actions are not truly his, they are the effect of Lily's grace shining through him. Ew.

That, alas, is just sick enough to be true.

I think the symbols that Syd sees in the stories are more of a WWII Nazi propaganda type image of Jews as a cabal, as monkey-faced, as people who would eat your children ...

Typical 20th century stereotypes of Jewish bankers, of hook-nosed salacious Jews out to seduce fair Christian maids, Passion Plays of which Gibson's "The Passion" is a direct descendant, conspiracy theories based on the Protocols, blood libels -- all this sort of garbage is at least as influential as Fagin and Shylock. Certain parts of the world are saturated with this sort of stuff, and worse. In HP we see it presented for the entertainment of children again, the difference being that instead of "Jew" the labels read "Slytherin", "Death Eater", "goblin", and "Greasy hook-nosed git".

This issue has been discussed before; I found comments on threads about Half-Blood Prince as well, though most tried to brush it off. The idea of an Open Letter may yet be feasible, especially if focused on issues such as permanently demonizing one House and condemning 11-year-olds as inherently evil; denigrating the courage and resourcefulness shown by Snape because of secondary personality traits the author chose not to have evolve in the course of his story arc; the hypocrisy of tolerating certain behaviors in one House but not another; advocating reconciliation and reunion but showing no progress towards achieving this; protesting discrimination against certain groups (house-elves, goblins) and either failing to show much progress towards equality or outright reinforcing of negative stereogypes. But where could we get it posted?

In the meantime, it will be interesting to see if she digs herself in any deeper and if fans start coming up with probing questions rather than the ususal requests for Shipping News and the like. If nothing else, there should be some interesting queries about Dumbledore, e.g., why was he such a jerk and why did you give him a free pass on it?"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173967

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173930

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/174027

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/175392

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/175579

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/176197

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/177302

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/177312

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/177357

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/177498

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/180688

Godwin's Wank

2008-11-07T00:19:39Z

After DH Snapefan Sydpad made following post on Tea at Spinner's End (the thread is entitled "JKR: Disturbed and Dangerous?"):

"I'm not trying to be provocative, I'm just laying out what it is we're looking at here. This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than seems right. They're not admitted into certain clubs and quite right too. They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint.

They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his salvation.

What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the 'pure' side-- has a freakin' *hooked nose*??! What was she *thinking*? JK Rowling, I appeal to you, *what were you thinking*?

I'm not, please believe me, I'm NOT accusing Rowling of anti-Semitism here. I wholeheartedly believe all this stuff is entirely unconscious-- it is inconceivable that she could have written that kind of symbolism otherwise. But believe me, there are large parts of the world where this unconscious message, will be recognized as a validation for something that I'm sure she would be utterly horrified at.

JKR wrote a book about bigotry. She has some nice stuff about racial integration that is great and would have been very daring in the 1950s. She rouses her readers into wholehearted condemnation of Nazis and genocide, always hard to do. Hooray for her. But part of the reason I was so certain we would get a reversal of Salazar's story, a proper reconciliation with the Slytherin kids, and the destruction of the Hat, is that I didn't think that someone who was gratuitously leaning on Nazi analogies left and right could *possibly* not have realized what sort of imagery she was using to construct Slytherin House. When 11-year-old Harry looks over at the 11-year-olds at the Slytherin table, after being told all about 'what they're like', and thinks to himself that they do look rather nasty, this to me was obviously about how bigotry works. When an entire society has built itself on labels and tribalism, that's how bigotry works. When what our tribe does is justified or at least mitigated by our purer feelings, and what their tribe does has selfish ulterior motives and is obviously wrong, when you can say, 'oh, he's a Slytherin and Slytherins always do this or that', that's what bigotry looks like. So, she's not advocating taking the kids sorted into Slytherin aside and shooting them. She's just totally fine with the idea that there is *something different about them*, but our Heroes should be kind and magnanimous like they are to House Elves (and don't even get me started on the House Elves). Oh, JKR wrote a book about bigotry all right.

sighs heavily* I really hate feeling like this. I wasn't being facetious when I said this might be my favorite book. There was a lot of beautiful stuff in it and Rowling is a storyteller of immense, almost frightening power. I never heard a bad thing about her personally in my life. But.. yeah, the total and utter validation of labelling people, labelling them at such a young age, and then having the people with good labels and people with bad ones.. it just goes so deeply against me it makes me feel sick. Maybe I'm just bitter because my vainglorious predictions were so totally wrong! And obviously I have strong preference for reconciliation and reversal stories. "The Little White Horse" is one of my favorite books. Bizarrely, it's also one of Rowling's. I can't get my head around it.

Just had to get that off my chest. Am I crazy? I really hate people who raise ridiculous political objections to innocuous stuff but this seems really, really dodgy to me."

Comments included:

"Bluestocking - Jul 26, 2007 4:50 pm (#410 of 1240)

it's even more Fagin than Shylock.

Possibly. I can see a case for both or either. At this point, I have to be grateful that we didn't actually get a scene like the end of Oliver Twist, where Harry comes to visit Snape in Azkaban in a last-ditch attempt to save his soul, etc. That would have done me in.

I also wonder about her strange fetishisizing of Snape's nose. The emphasis is always on its hooked nature, which is so strongly associated with Semitic features that I'm really startled nobody on the editing team was leery about it. Oddly enough, I'd also been thinking about the crying scene. The decription of the tear rolling down his hooked nose is such an odd detail that it seems deliberately included for almost comedic or pathetic effect. Why aren't the tears, for example, running down his face? This effect is highlighted by the fact that he's crying about a letter that wasn't even written to him. Instead, he holds up somebody else's letter like a relic that's been made holy by the fact that Lily touched it.

Again, this might not be deliberate, but the effect is there, all the same.

The story is better than the writing of it.

And so are the characters, thankfully.

fool4luv - Jul 26, 2007 4:58 pm (#411 of 1240)
Edited by Jul 26, 2007 6:04 pm

This book has given us a population characterized by 'ambition' and 'cunning', they are often described as having 'greedy' expressions. They always seem to be in positions of power and have more money than seems right... They can't be trusted-- their loyalties are not those of the rest of society. In a war they will probably run or switch sides or try to profit from the suffering of others. They manipulate the government from behind the scenes to their own purposes, using money and mesmeric powers. They keep themselves to themselves and never fit in; who they are seems to be partly by birth-- established by nasty inbreeding--, partly by belief, and partly by some invisible taint.

They killed Harry Potter and refused to accept his salvation.

What does a House like this sound like to you? A House associated with reptiles and ghettoes like Nocturn Alley? A House whose Founder has a 'monkey-like' face and a name that's suspiciously foreign? A House with sinister ties to Eastern Europe? Whose Head-- redeemed only by a passion, presented as kind of creepy and wrong, for a woman on the 'pure' side-- has a freakin' *hooked nose*??! What was she *thinking*? JK Rowling, I appeal to you, *what were you thinking*?

No, Syd, you're not wrong. It hit me in the face like a sack of wet garbage during the "Griphook" chapters, but I'd blocked the rest of it out until now. From what I understand there is a major recrudescence of anti-Semitism in Europe to the point where, in some circles, it is trendy and "politically correct". I fear what you've pointed out is neither deliberate nor "unconscious" on Rowling's part, but just the sad reflection of a growing social reality that has become so twisted she might actually experience a bit of fashionable Jew-hating as part of her stand against "racism" and "bigotry". Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's the reality now and I think the evidence stands on its own. "

"textualsphinx2003 - Jul 27, 2007 3:13 am (#415 of 1240)
Did anyone else notice how 1984 Snape's death was? He's in his personal room 101 - the Shrieking Shack - and Voldemort traps his head in a cage with a biting animal (not a rat, as for Winston Smith, but a snake). I suppose she could have been REALLY cruel and had Voldemort summon Greyback to finish Snape off, but maybe that would have been too obvious.

I think the spectre of anti-semitism, however unconsious (didn't JKR READ Dickens and and look at Nazi propoganda?) is a very troubling issue. I have a very Gryffindorish proposal: could we collectively pen a concise and careful Open Letter to Rowling explaining why we are disturbed and put it - erm, any ideas who would host it where she'd find it?"

"textualsphinx2003 - Jul 28, 2007 8:38 am (#421 of 1240)
More on 'the slytherin question' and the spectre of anti-semitism in JKR's presentation of them.

Syd's metaphor about the 3D camera 'trick' (several pictures taken on same subject from slightly different places and put together - I have such a camera and I had such a thought about JKR's apparent 3 D-ness!). Well, we get two 'takes' on Slytherin. One of them is imbued with the clichйs of antisemitic literature even though the characters are not labelled 'Jewish' (When Dickens got stick for Fagin from some Jewish fans, he just made sure, in 'Our mutual Friend' for example, that the sleazy social climbing guy, with a big nose, wasn't identified as Jewish - so saying, but there's nice Antony Goldstein of Ravenclaw doesn't cut it). Anyway, the other 'take' on Slytherin is the Public School and Old Boys Network. (JKR divides the Public School heritage into Bad Stuff for Slytherin and Good Stuff, muscular Christianity etc for Gryffs). So the picture we get is a confusing overlay that may account, for instance, for JOdel's observation about the 'ambitious' house being populated by those too entitled to privelege to need it.

Of course, Conspiracy theories about Jews are, precisely, a projection of the machinations of the Old Boy Network onto Others.

The really fundamental question is this: why did JKR decide *in the first place* to locate the source of what seems to be a fairly pervasive prejudice in Wizarding society squarely in one bad House. Why did she not show that it didn't have a single source but was a collective responsibility?

Grrr. It would have been so cool to have Slughorn crying 'Slugs, on guard!' and had a load of savvy slytherins join the fight."

Sydpad didn't stop there and decided to bring the wank to HPforGrownups:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173514

Other people who featured prominently here were lealess, horridporrid03 and marionros:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173228

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173530

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173555

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/173633

Godwin's Wank

2008-11-07T00:18:09Z

That's how Slytherfen often interpret canon (I apologize for tl;dr, but I believe the subject deserves it):

That particular interpretation existed before DH:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/143977

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/151795

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/168199

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/168724

the_hms_stfu @ 2008-11-04T22:29:00

2008-11-04T19:34:06Z

JKR told Kloves that Harry and Hermione "could have gone that way" - http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/29420631.html.

It's already "discussed" on The Emma Watson Forums.

Lissy Report

2008-10-24T18:59:06Z

Latest Lissy/Lysette batshit from FAP:

From A.R.G.H. (C.S. Ginny/Harry) XLI: Quidditch, Snogging and uh, umm... snogging?:

"I tend to view Molly as Rowling answer to "$kank Daddy" from Croweland (Russell Crowe Fandom), namely that as soon as Molly latched onto how much Harry was worth (I knew there was a reason why Rowling kept HAMMERING that Harry was rich, but could not be bothered to spend it.) was so that we would get that Harry was the Weasley's Meal Ticket out of the Poor Farm and into the wealth and prestige Molly always dreamed of. $kank Daddy was determined that that was exactly what would happen as he started the Australian Children's Music Resource Center because "He was connected to Russell Crowe." Those from Australia, do you remember that? $kank Daddy did get a van out of it. I doubt if much more.

Once Molly started getting the word that poor little ORPHAN Harry was worth a TON, she was almost nice to Ronald until Harry was "officially" adopted. After that, so what, Harry was spending all his time with the Weasleys just like that Hermione girl. Hermione even dropped her own family completely so she could be a Full Time Weasley. Ronald was now the spare. By GoF, Molly was on the campaign trail to get Harry married off to her little princess (Like Robot Girl was good for anything else?) to the Golden Prince, soon to be Chosen One. Notice that in Crapilogue, the Weasleys are now in the position the Malfoys USED to be in, and the Malfoys are now the Weasleys of the New Order. Bot Girl could be as dumb as a brick, and is, as long as like $kank she lands that rich guy husband. The only differences between Bot-Girl and $kank are age and Bot doesn't bleach her hair green-white like $kank."

"If you see 27 Dresses, then you will see G/H in action, namely Tess, in order to land her sister's Boss, George, has sister, Jane, tell Tess everything about George so that she can be George's "Ideal." Jane is "in love" with her Boss, so knows all -- tells all. Of course, George would HAVE to fall for Tess, she appears to be everything George wants. Only the Tess, George thinks he is marrying, doesn't really exist. Tess took up all his interests and habits, not because she shared them in any way, quite the contrary, but she wanted to land a rich guy, and George was at hand.

Gin-Bot became Harry's "Ideal Girl," not because she actually was, but to land Harry. Gin-Bot didn't even like Quidditch when it was silly Ron and Bot's Brothers playing it, but when Harry played it, suddenly Gin-Bot had to as well. Even though she thought it was violent, and fell asleep at the World Cup, in OotP, Bot is the most Fab player besides Harry, himself. Suddenly, the only opinions Bot had were Harry's. We, the readers, do not know what Bot's opinions of ANYTHING actually are (besides hating Fleur) because Bot agrees to anything Harry says or does, even when it is stupid or down right dangerous. I'm sure she eats all his favorite things because HE likes them. Does his favorite things because HE likes them, and no one cares about the little Bot, not even Bot. It can almost make you feel sorry for the Bot, until you remember what a piece of work she really is, and then you are glad that "You should beware of what you beseech the Gods. They may be listening."

"quote:

And if Ginny was willing to break up with Dean for something as small as helping her through the portrait hole, then how the hell did she not break up with Harry for completely ignoring her while running off to save the world with Ron and Hermione? Furthermore, why didn't she break up with him for pulling the whole "it's too dangerous for you" spiel?
I'm sensing some severe imbalance.

But Harry is The Chosen One and, as far as Gin-Bot is concerned, richer than God, as Rowling keeps hammering on us readers, while Dean is a big NOBODY! Harry can give Gin-Bot all "The Golden Showers" he wants, and she will still come back for more. Gin-Bot is nothing more than Harry's stupid little groupie. See Penny Lane in Almost Famous, only Penny got her Wake Up Call when she nearly died because of Him, while Bot is too stupid and too fixated on The Prize = Money and Fame to notice what Harry does to her. Rather like Little J on Gossip Girl, Ya think."

"Rowling's writing is like the Winchester Mystery House, namely you have staircases that go nowhere, rooms that you can't get into, and other pointless junk. Mrs. Sara Winchester (Wife of the inventor of the Winchester Rifle) was told by a fortune teller that if she ever stopped building, that she would die. She had already lost her husband, so she was convinced that the ghosts of those killed by the Winchester Rifle where out to get her. She did live to be quite old. My point is that the Winchester Mystery House is full of rooms that are useless, doors and staircases that go nowhere, and is said to be haunted. It used to really look like it was haunted until they fixed it up, and gave it some paint. A lot of things in the Winchester Mystery House are completely pointless to all of us not Sara Winchester, and it turns out most of Harry Potter is completely pointless and goes nowhere unless you are J K Rowling. Rowling might have a purpose for all that junk, but we do not see it anymore than we see the point of doors that open to a sheer drop two floors. G/H just happens to be one of the most glaring examples of a staircase that dead ends in a ceiling or a door the opens to nowhere. Us readers wonder why Rowling bothered to build G/H at all, since it doesn't actually go anywhere.

Sara Winchester was viewed as being Mad when she was alive..."

"Actually, the Winchester Mystery House even lends itself to the post book interviews because unless a question is about one of Rowling's favorite Weasleys or the Master of Secrets and Lies AKA Dumbledore, Rowling STILL does not want to answer it. She thinks anything not involving one of her favorite Weasleys is the same as asking "What is Yeoman Janice Rand's Cabin Number?" in Star Trek, and I saw William Shatner (Mr. Wonderful) freak out over how stupid anyone was wanting to know that. Back then, Willie had trouble having any interest in anything past the end of his nose. If you ask Rowling about The Ronald, The Ronald's wife and kids or something else Rowling considers important, she'll answer. But Rowling doesn't seem to like the Wife and Womb Unit beyond being a Wife and Womb Unit because that was the sum total of what Rowling planned for her, or Hermione for that matter, because "if a girl doesn't marry and pop out kids, what good is she?" If you ask Rowling how many kids Gin-Bot popped out, she has that pat, but ask her anything about the Bot that has nothing to do with how she relates to Harry, and Rowling can't keep her answers straight from one interview to the next. It was kind of mean on her part to jump on that guy in the IoF for bring up her hard sell of Bot in the IoD, which she then forgot all about after telling Memerson. The ONLY power Bot had was having the Weasley Womb, that is the ONLY thing that made Gin-Bot special -- get over it. Before the last book came out, Rowling kept claiming that it would tie up all the loose ends and answer all the questions, but she meant about her favorite Weasleys and how many kids they had, anything else was like a staircase that went nowhere or a door that opened to a sheer drop, namely Rowling forgot she ever started building them and does not care to hear about that crap now. If she put a door in a wall, but when you open it, all you find is a brick wall behind it or better yet nothing, that is YOUR PROBLEM. Rowling forgot that door was ever there, and she doesn't want to hear about it now. If you were a Good Fan, then you wouldn't see that ****** door either because Rowling told you it wasn't really there.

BELIEVE!!!"

"I always thought that Gin-Bot got reactivated in OotP because Voldemort had gotten a new body the end of GoF, and that Bot and Voldemort were connected like Bot was a Sleeper Cell. Bot came alive when Voldy wasn't Vapormort anymore, even if it meant Bot was once again under his control. That would have made Bot more interesting, even if it would have pissed off Orange Crushie. Like I care. I have been hated for even posting that theory by Teh Church of the Holy One and Orange Crushie. (The "One time she asked me how to spell 'Orange' types.) I mean Rowling had to have a reason why Tom looked just like an older Harry, and Bot had a crush on both boys. I always thought Bot-Girl couldn't tell them apart. Anyhow, Rowling decided that EVERYONE was better and more useful than Bot-Girl because that Weasley Womb could not be risked in battle or anything, so Hermione, Lune, Cho and the other girls Harry knows do stuff for the cause. But Bot stays home so that she can pop out babies -- LOTS later.

"Another Celebutant with yapping purse mutt." Lucy Spiller Dirt"

From Can't Stand Molly:

"You know, generally, when a boy asks a girl to marry him, the parents of both have a meeting sometime before the wedding. They are going to be family soon -- No? So they should meet the parents of the other. Not Molly. Hermione disowns her parents and then obliterates any memories they had of her so that Hermione could be a Full-Time Weasley without their unconvenient presence to distract her from her full time job of taking care of The Ronald (Can Hermione COOK?!) and washing the Ronald's socks. Her inconvenient Muggle Parents were in the way of Hermione being accepted as one of Molly's own. They might have to actually visit Hermione's parents rather than Molly on some Holiday. And can you imagine Molly meeting Hermione's parents? They are Professional people. Their daughter wanting to marry a Weasley is almost like somebody finding out that their kid wanted to marry one of the "Riches" in The Riches, and they're GYPSIES! Oh my!

Molly is a County Bumpkin and Proud of It. Think Sh**kicker."

"quote:

Oh, I agree. Take how Ron and Hermione's wedding might have gone. I can just hear Molly's clucks of dismay if Ron and Hermione wanted -horrors- a Muggle style wedding. She'd be upset, all angry and weepy that it wasn't a good wizarding wedding at the Burrow, and then she'd be condescending. No matter what kind of wedding it was, she'd be all over it, too, just like Bill/Fleur's. The Grangers, like the Delacours, would be accessories at their daughter's wedding.

Why do you think Hermione had to send her PARENTS off to Australia with no memories of ever having a kid? Molly wanted no competition from the opposition, namely any in laws. Harry was perfect because he had money and fame and NO LIVING RELATIVES! On Holidays, there should be no question as to what family they should be spent with. There IS NO family outside the Burrow. That is why the Weasleys didn't associate with their neighbors -- because like a Cult, you are either IN or your OUT! Luna had her father, so was OUT! Having ANYONE come before Molly was like any of Voldemort's gang putting anyone before their allegiance to Voldemort! Anyone in their "Gang" has to be ALL theirs."

"I bet that when "Darling Jenny" went to the Ball with NEVILLE, Molly was not pleased.

Molly "You will MARRY Harry POTTER, I don't want to hear any complaints about it!"

"Jenny" "But, Mum, he doesn't even know I'm alive!"

Molly "Then do something to FIX IT! You WILL marry Harry Potter!"

I think Jenny got told to talk to Harry Potter no matter what, so at the beginning of OotP, she tried, even though Harry generally STILL ignored her. I think Molly used a spell to make Jenny SUDDENLY a Super Duper Quidditch player because nothing else was working. See something like Mulan, where a girl's only value was to marry well and produce lots of babies. Molly got the second one right, if not the first, so Jenny meant Molly had a second chance to get it right.

I wonder what Rowling would say, if she knew how much we all "loved" her wonderful Molly, a woman right out of Dickens, namely large, loud, mean and scary."

From Debate: Molly Weasley- Ideal Mother or Manipulative You-Know-What?:

"I view Molly Weasley as a shorter, chunkier version of Stella Mudd from Star Trek, and they both even have red hair.

And to quote Harry Mudd from I, Mudd:

quote:

"This, gentlemen, is a shrine, to the memory of my dear wife, Stella."
"Dead?"
"No, no, no – merely deserted. You see, gentlemen, behind every great man, there is a woman urging him on. And, so it was with my Stella. She urged me on into outer space– not that she meant to, actually, but with her confounded, eternal, continual nagging – (recovers) I think of her constantly; and every time I do, I go further out into space."
- Harry Mudd

"That's very interesting– you leave your wife, but then bring her along."
Dr. McCoy

"I had the androids construct an exact replica of Stella, so that I could gaze upon her... and rejoice in her absence. Gentlemen – attend: (clears his throat) Stella, dear."
Harry

(mechanically at first) "Har-court! Harcourt Fenton Mudd! Where have you been? What have you been up to? Nothing good, I'm sure – well, let me tell you, you lazy, good-for-nothing–"
Stella

"Shut up!"
Harry

(winding down) "– thing, thing, thing..."
Stella

(laughs) "Marvelous! I finally have the last word with her... and with you."
-Harry

Molly and, for that matter MiniMolly, harken back to their "Mother," Stella Mudd."

From Debate: Arthur Weasley, as a parent and as a person:

"Arthur and Molly are Good Cop, Bad Cop, when it comes to Parenting. Arthur is like Regina George's Mom in Mean Girls, who spend so much time trying to be "buds" with her daughter, that said daughter walks ALL OVER Mom. Regina even kicks her parents out of the biggest bed room -- theirs, and Mom is fine with it. She is busy serving REAL drinks to her daughter and her friends, and even catches her daughter making out with some boy in her room, and she is "Okay" with that, too.

When the boys took the car, he just wanted to know how it did, even though just having that stupid car could get him fired from work, and then where would his family be? I like how he got tickets for EVERYONE for the World Cup BUT Molly. Arthur wants to be the COOL DAD, so when he does bluster, EVERYONE ignores him. They all know that he is ALL bark and NO bite. As a parent, Arthur is JUST as USELESS as Regina's Mom."

From A.R.G.H. (C.S. Harry/Ginny) XLII: Lower Your Standards:

"I thought the last two books, in particular, became "The Ronald Weasley Show." The IMPORTANT Romance was Ronald's because he is the real star, like in Sherlock Holmes, where Watson might be telling the tale, but it is ABOUT Holmes. Ronald is the favorite main character, and is paired off with the main female character, and since Harry was just supposed to DIE on Command, he could be paired off with any random, nothing female character or no one. It is not like it matters. In the end, Harry's name might have been in the book titles, but he wasn't particularly important to the plot past dying on Dumbledore's Command. I mean so what if or who Harry got paired off with, any ship of his would be a SIDESHIP to any ship of Ronald's, anyway."

"Actually, Made of Honor is how H/Hr would have happened. Tom and Hannah are best friends, they do everything together but "date." Have for 10 years. Tom and Hannah call the other one about their date with someone else after it has ended, even. Then Hannah goes to Scotland for 6 weeks on a Buy for her employer, and she is suddenly GONE, and Tom is left adrift. He has no one to go to the Bakery with so they can eat each other's desserts. He has no one to go to the vintage store they like with, and suddenly he badly wants Hannah back because no one else is the same, or likes the same things they do. Tom plans to tell her his fellings when she comes back, even has flowers with him, only she comes back with a Scotsman, and they are to get MARRIED. Now Tom knows that the thought of Hannah moving across the pond is unbearable to him, and sets about breaking them up by stealing the Bride. He actually thought she would marry, and then stay in New York while her Husband lived in Scotland so nothing would REALLY change, and got FLOORED when she said she was moving permanently.

With G/H, Harry knows that if he says, "Heel," Gin-Bot is right there. And if he says "Get lost," she is off sulking in a corner until he calls her. Gin-Bot is the faithful DOG."

"I was watching the False Flag episode of Burn Notice this morning, and Robot Girl is Evelyn as Michael perceived her to be, namely the oh so helpless female that needs a Big Strong MAN to protect them. Males that have a "people saving thing" to start with, fall for it hook, line and sinker. Bot might be the Biatch from H@ll to everyone else, but to Harry she is the weak, helpless female that needs protecting. She feeds his ego. We see Bot the way Fiona saw Evelyn, namely that we think Harry is being played for the sucker he is, just like Michael was being played for a stupid sucker by Evelyn. ONLY Michael learned the hard way that Evelyn was playing him for a fool, while Rowling is offended that we do not think "Good Job, Ginny" for her games. Rowling is the real Master of Secrets and Lies."

"I was watching Ella Enchanted, yesterday, and I have another pair that G/H is like, namely Hattie/Char. The main difference is that when Hattie runs after Prince Char, claiming that he is her future husband to her silly sister Olive, Char runs to the hills. That is how he and Ella meet in the first place, he is running from Hattie, and Hattie had just sent Ella home through Ella's Obedience Curse so that Ella wouldn't mess up Hattie's future by ruining her first meeting with Char. Later, Hattie tells Char that she has his posters all over her walls and has his pictures, and would hang outside the castle so she could watch him turn on and off his lights at night. Char thinks Hattie is insane.

Harry, on the other hand, loves the idea of Gin-Bot sitting at his feet, rubbing his tired feet like a Good Girl. Harry is The Chosen One, and should be Worshipped by right. By HBP, Harry figures out that Gin-Bot has "grown a pair," and being a little wannabe Prince Edgar, you know, the one who killed his brother, blamed it on Ogres so that they can take the fall and be enslaved, and is going to kill Char so he can be King, feels he SHOULD be worshipped by all. Given what Rowling has said lately, I suspect she secretly thinks Edgar was in the right all along, and the rest of us are stupid to believe otherwise."

From HMS T.I.R.E IX (Can't Stand R/Hr): As Fake as Ron's Parseltonge

"quote:

No, you weren't the only person seriously bothered by that. Like others here I'm flummoxed as to why Rowling would put that in. Practicing deceit and duplicity towards your wife does NOT a good relationship or happy marriage make. It's an obvious fact furnished to us which proves that Ron never really matured, even though Rowling desperately put in several scenes in the very last book which had him amazingly show concern for house elves, think of using the Basilisk fangs and the like. But that didn't matter; the epilogue shows that, when it comes down to his personal needs, Ron Weasley doesn't bother about ethical standards or being honest with his wife.

Hey, Ronald was lying to the future wife and womb unit all the way through DH. Guys, you know this. Why does a guy suddenly do a 180 on beliefs that he has held near and dear all his life because some girl he knows believes the opposite? Because he wants to get in her "you know whats." Just like a girl suddenly pretending to like SPORTS because some guy she likes does. (Ginny) She wants a boyfriend to show off to her girl friends the same way the guy wants a conquest to brag about to his buddies. In Ronald's case, we KNOW that this is so because he is still going behind Hermione's back and telling Harry not to tell Hermione what he is really doing. It is like the Joe Nichols song where he claims he spent the whole afternoon in the hammock, even though he really spent it with the guys doing you know what. She, unlike Hermione, KNOWS he is lying because she already tossed that hammock in the attic. The problem with basing your relationship on LIES Ronald, it that eventually you tell so many that you can't keep track of them all.

See 27 Dresses for this one, where the sister pumps for information on her sister Jane's rich Boss, and suddenly becomes his "Dream Girl" because he IS Rich. It is NOT like she likes the same things or even eats the same things he does really. She is just trying to land the Rich Guy. Ronald was trying to land the only girl he knew, besides the "Easy" Lavender, who he thought he had a shot at. Lavender was Too Easy, even for him. Any girl THAT EASY is obviously not worth anything.

"Off the Hillbilly hook,
The Redneck chain..."

"I saw an ad for Baby Mama that kind of explains R/Hr perfectly,

quote:

Angie Ostrowiski: It's like Tom and Jerry...
Kate Holbrook: But they hate each other...
Angie Ostrowiski: I don't know what movie you saw, but they LOVE each other.

Tom and Jerry, just like Ronald and Hermione, are always trying to kill each other, so it Must be Love.

RIGHT!"

"A common accusation of H/Hr is that it puts the two characters on pedestals above the rest of the characters. Is there a elitist dynamic along the lines of what the anti-H/Hr crowd describes in R/Hr?

The "Good Ship" is all about Ron, which would be great if the series was "Ronald Weasley and..." I would never have been here if it was, but there you go. Per Good Ship, H/Hr could never work because it would leave out Ron, even though R/Hr made Ronald more important and Harry less. One of the arguments FOR R/Hr is that Harry and Hermione would never have been friends if it wasn't for Ronald, and he is the only thing that holds them together. One of the counter arguments for that is that HARRY, not Ronald, in the role of peacemaker is the only thing that holds the Trio together by moderating between warring Ronald and Hermione. The problem with Ronald and Hermione's fights is that they only care that they win and the other one loses. They come off rather like Somalia, where there are 10 factions in an ongoing civil war, and each faction says they want peace, but only by winning and destroying the other 9 factions. I suspect that with Harry not in easy reach, the kids are expected to moderate their "parents'" arguments and keep whatever peace there is. Bad environment for children because they tend to think their parents are fighting BECAUSE of the children, but Rowling seems to like it."

From Do you hate OBHWF and why?

"OBHWF, AKA The Weasley Chronicles, do indicate how important each character is to Rowling, as someone post on another thread because the most important non-Weasley characters were married TO Weasleys, secondary characters were married to characters named in the books, but were not Weasleys like Neville, characters that you are NOT supposed to like, like Draco and Cho are married off to people not mentioned anywhere but in an interview to show everyone, particularly their fans, how unimportant they really are. Then there is Luna, who is the exception that proves the rule because I do not think Rowling thought far enough to consider Luna's future, which is why she is not in Crapilogue. Then people started acting like Luna was as important as a Weasley and asking about her husband and kids and WHY she was left off of Crapilogue, so Rowling had to think of something on the fly. I am actually surprised that she didn't pair off Luna with George or Charlie, just to get her in the Weasleys. I suppose it is to make those who think the Weasleys are the perfect family happy, but for those of us who see the Weasleys as ANYTHING BUT Ideal, well it is just another reason to dislike Rowling and her never ending mouth.

As someone said about Carpet Book (Now known as DH) OBHWF makes the Weasley Collective look just like the Borg, namely anyone who is anyone worth while, must be assimilated into the Weasley Collective. Only those with no value, like Draco or Cho, are not worth assimilating. In Crapilogue, the Weasleys are made to look JUST LIKE the Borg on Star Trek, only we are NOT supposed to like the Borg because they ARE the Bad Guys."

From A.R.G.H. (C.S. Harry/Ginny) XLIII: Shoelaces of LUV!:

"Well, Rowling likes to pretend that Gin-Bot is Laura Croft/Mrs. Smith to everyone else although she comes off as more a spoiled little self-centered BRAT (Rather like the Ronald) than Laura Croft, but Harry is her Lord and Master, so she should be tying his shoes laces, washing HARRY's undies same as Hermione should be washing the Ronald's, and SO ON. Remember, Molly trained both girls on what their proper place is -- behind their man, urging him onward. Of course, they could end up like Stella Mudd, who urged her man onward. She urged him into Outer Space with her continual NAGGING, and every time Harry Mudd thinks about his Stella, he goes further out into Outer Space. I suspect that, just like Harry Mudd and Arthur Weasley, Harry and the Ronald will spend a lot of time away from the home to avoid the continual, never ending, ETERNAL NAGGING.

As to the MAP, Harry having the right to moon over it is more important than any "Safety" it might provide Gin-Bot and those HE left behind. Bot should just learn to Do Without!"

"Generally, in Heroic Romance, the Romance is supposed to make the partners, each, more than they ever thought they could be before because they draw strength from their partner. That is how the Hero is SUPPOSED to be able to do the amazingly Heroic things he/she does. G/H is more like Bonnie and Clyde, where they got together and are nastier and more terrible together than either one of them ever were alone. The reader or viewer is rather glad when they are permanently stopped in a rather gruesome and bloody way. The car that Bonnie and Clyde died in still exists and has something like 130 bullet holes in it. But Bonnie and Clyde were Anti-Heroes, so they could act that way. Harry and Robot are SUPPOSED to be Heroes, so why do they act like a less lethal version of Bonnie and Clyde?

I think Rowling mixed up the Hero's Journey with the Anti-Hero because her writing draws far more from the Anti-Hero than the Hero. Rather than becoming more Noble and Heroic, her Hero becomes meaner and baser until it is hard to tell the difference between the Hero and the Villain."

"I NEVER liked Bot-Girl from the Train Station in PS. She reminded me way to much of someone I used to know a long time ago who was just like the Bot, only she was not just a liar, she was a CRAZY liar who dragged other people into her lies to hurt them. I got a phone call from my "friend's" sister after the sister and mom had found her diary. She had run off after convincing her then boyfriend to pull a gun on her mother. The diary claimed that she had been pregnant, and I had driven her to the hospital when she miscarried. It was news to me. It was also news to the supposed father of this supposed baby (not the boyfriend) who had NEVER even dated this girl once. The girl lived in her FantasyWorld 24/7, and anyone that this girl viewed as a threat in her Fantasy World was dealt with in Real Life, even if they had no idea what they might have wrong to deserve it. Rather like Ginny getting jealous of Fleur's little sister, who was only eleven, because in Ginny's World even a child was a possible threat. My friend was really out there and really NEEDED psychiatric help. Gin-Bot comes off as someone who was heading down the very same road. Gin-Bot lives in a Fantasy World, but, alas, her fantasies tend to intrude in those around her's reality.

I started disliking Stupid Harry by the time he arrived at Hogwarts with a broken at the beginning of HBP, and he only went down hill from there. I think Gin-Bot and Harry deserve each other because I do not think anyone else deserves to have either Bot or Harry inflicted on them."

"I think the problem is that the Costumer likes to dress Bonnie as Gin-Bot as dressing like a slightly female verson of Ronald. I mean, Gin-Bot was the only girl that I remember wearing trousers with her school uniform of ALL the girls in OotP. They dress Hermione as girly-girly with the infamous "pink hoodie," and the Bot as more manish than Carter on Stargate SG1 at her worse. And They had Carter in Motorcycle Leathers more than once. Maybe somebody on the production supports Ronald/Harry, and Boy!Bot/Harry is the closest they can get?"

"What I might even want to go see HPB for is when everybody and their brother are stating how beautiful and Hawt! Gin-Bot is because they just released a photo from an interview of Dan, Rupert and Bonnie, and somebody in costuming seems to think that Molly WANTED a seventh boy, and therefore dresses Gin-Bot as one. Without the long hair, you would really think she was a boy. Now, I used to know someone whose parents wanted a boy, and got her instead. They gave her a boy sounding name, and dressed her in boy clothes from the beginning, and boy was she ever messed up. This was in the old Trekkie Fandom, and you had to be really out there to stick out as WEIRD there."

From R.U.I.N.S. (C.S. DH) III: Who Owns Your Wand Today?:

"Like the whole business about House Elf Slavery. Ronald was NEVER upset about the institution of it, only that he, Ronald, did not own a House Elf. It is like the one man in the play "1776" said about it, "A poor man would rather protect the possiblity of becoming rich, than face the reality of being forever poor." The most important part about Crapilogue was that it proved that the Right People, namely the Weasleys, were now wealthy and on top of the Social Ladder, and the Wrong People, see Malfoys, were NOT! That is the whole series in a nut shell. The Institutions were never wrong, just the people in them. With the Right People running things, even Slavery is perfectly acceptable."

From R.U.I.N.S. (C.S. DH) IV: All Flaws Revealed on the Dark Lord Mental Broadcast:

"The thing about the House Elves is that Ronald and gang's view of them is just like the Aristocracy's view of Serfs. Namely that if Serfs didn't have anyone to serve, what would they do? How would they live? Who would take care of them? It is not like they are even capable of appreciating fine paintings, or brandy or furniture. They just think that all these things are merely fuel for fires for warmth. (From the Hornblower Mini Series, only the one who said it ended up meeting Madame Guillotine through those same lowly serfs.) Most people are happy to ignore Disposable People until they become one. Ronald's views on House Elves, Giants, Werewolves, Vampires, Centaurs and Muggles to name a few, would have gotten a rude awakening if somehow HE had ended up on his list of Undesirable -- Unacceptable People. The most important thing about Crapilogue is not that the Wizarding Institutions were biased, unfair and just plain wrong and should be CHANGED, but that the Right People, namely the Weasleys, were not running them. Wrong people like the Malfoys were. Slavery is perfectly fine, if you believe Rowling, just so long as the Slave Owners treat their slaves kindly. Serfs should want to be serfs because they know no better, and would die if left to their own devices."

From A.R.G.H. (C.S. Harry/Ginny) XLIV: H/G: Movies Are The New Canon:

"I thought after the IoD that Harry was dying in DH, and we would find out that Ronald had chronicled the whole thing as a "memorial" to his friend Harry. Yeah, I was expecting Ronald to be a "Doctor Watson," but that would mean that Ronald could care about anyone or anything that wasn't useful to the Ronald at the moment, which would explain why the hero's relationship was a sideline or afterthought of the sidekick's relationship. Tells you what I know. I think Rowling got so caught up in the whole "Will they or won't they" for Ronald and Hermione that it wasn't until HBP that she remembered that she hadn't bothered to do anything with her hero, so she figured Gin-Bot wasn't doing much and she's a girl, so pass her hero off on Robot and get back to what everyone (read Memerson, her pet fans) wanted anyway, namely MORE R/Hr. She spent seven books supposedly on developing R/Hr and a handful of chapters here and therein developing her Hero's romance, so obviously G/H is the sideship to the sidekick's romance. Now you get the Doctor Watson comparisons, namely the books might be about Holmes, but Watson wrote them, so he knows his relationships, but can only observe what he can of any Holmes might have had."

"quote:

Wasn't the first part of the "soulmates" quote was that they'd been through things together?

Yeah, Harry and Botty had been through a "journey" together, only problem is that it never made it out of Rowling's head, or it got "left on the cutting room flloor" when editing the books, like when they wanted to edit out the Troll "Battle" for space in PS, only this time it WAS left out because it never made it into the finished Product. Harry Potter turned out to not be a story about characters you like but a Product to be SOLD to the Masses. Harry Potter is to Story Telling what the Monkees were to the Beatles. I liked the Monkees when I first saw them, particulary Mickey, but I was like six at the time. The Monkees were a Corporate creation of what Corporate America thought an American Beatles could be like, but it was created in a Boardroom, not a garage, just like Harry Potter. All that ever mattered was Units Sold, not if it was any good or not."

"What kind of kinky roleplay scenarios do you think Harry and Ginny engage in when they're in the bedroom?

I think they should just cut to the chase, Harry is "Allan" the "well-hung" stable boy, and Ginny is the horse. Thank you Yates for that idea.

But Yates is responsible for Krull so what do you want? I saw part of an old interview of his about Krull resently, and from the way he was talking, you should think Krull was the greatest movie of our time. I guess everyone has their little fantasies."

From R.U.I.N.S. (C.S. DH) V: Providing Protection from Potter Paradigm Paralysis:

"quote:

And I can't fight this feeling anymore
I've forgotten what I started fighting for
It's time to bring this ship into the shore
And throw away the oars, forever

Cause I can't fight this feeling anymore
I've forgotten what I started fighting for
And if I have to crawl upon the floor
Come crushing through your door
Baby, I can't fight this feeling anymore.
REO Speedwagon

Granted it is the gag reflex from Carpet Book AKA Ronald Weasley and the Deathly Shallows as it will ALWAYS be to me. As a hero, Harry is only good for dying on command. Makes you kind of wish the happy crew from Death Race to roll through and kill everybody, starting with BOTH Voldy-Moldy and his Dork Eaters, AND the Weasleys and their silly "order."

I still, even now, swear that Rowling read "Damage Control," where Dumbledore had gone mad, and was letting all these people die every day so his great non-plan would come to pass, and LOVED LOVED LOVED it.. In 'Damage Control" Dumbledore thought that if Voldy made physical contact with Harry enough times (Like a whole lot of times) Voldy would die. Who cares if it could take years and thousands die, and Voldy might kill off Harry first so it wouldn't work, Dumbledore was going to sit on his hands and wait. I still think the best villian in the Harry Potter Series is the ultimately creepy Dumbledore because it turns out Dumbledore is Twisted Sister's Captain Howdy for reals.

quote:

OH, IT'S SO NICE TO SEE YOU ALL INSIDE MY DREAMY LITTLE WORLD
AND IT'S SO NICE TO BE WITH ALL YOU LOVELY LITTLE BOYS AND GIRLS
MAKE YOURSELVES COMFORTABLE
MY PLACE IS SO DEVINE
DON'T YOU THINK I'M WONDERFUL?
SAY YES! YOU'RE ON MY TIME

STAY AWAY
FROM CAPTAIN HOWDY
STAY AWAY
FROM CAPTAIN HOWDY

DON'T TRY TO LEAVE THE DOORS ARE LOCKED AND ONLY I HAVE GOT THE KEY
FORGET THE WINDOWS THEY'RE NAILED SHUT AND BOARDED UP
SO YOU CAN'T SEE
YOU'LL LOVE THE LIGHT SHOW
OH, I'M SURE YOU'LL THINK IT'S SWELL
WHEN THEY GO OFF
YOUR WELCOME TO MY LIVING HELL

"Horror Teria -- Twisted Sister

I view Dumbledore as the real monster in Harry Potter, and Voldy and Harry as his stupid creations that he wants to have fight and kill each other for Dumbledore's amusement. I doubt if that is what Rowling meant to write, but that is what got on the pages. That would seem to me to be a pretty big misstake, making one of the "heroes" come off as the scariest monster in the whole series. The King's Cross scene just closed the deal. Dumbledore - Captain Howdy, what's the diff?"

From C.S.T.A.R. V: Because We Always Knew She Was A Harpy!:

"You know, Gin-Bot does act like a friend I used to have, who went through the entire Cheerleading Squad (back when there were only female cheerleaders) before they figured out that they really didn't want to go all-the-way with any of them. It was not like he couldn't because he was a "blue-eyed Blonde Surfer type," but he said girls "smelled like fish." He still had women passing him their phone numbers all the time, until he disappeared soon after he got diagnosed with AIDS.

Up until HBP, Gin-Bot's crush on Harry was like tweeners crushing on Lance Bass because it was not like he would EVER be interested in any of them, so he is safe to crush on. Ever notice how tweeners tend to like guys who look more like pretty "girls" but without the boobs, namely non-masculine/safe? Robot is like them, namely chasing after a guy who is patentedly NOT interested. Then in HBP, Rowling finally figured that she Ooopsed because most fans (besides those dumb H/Hr shippers) didn't care any more who Harry was going to hook-up with because they only cared about RONALD! In DH, Rowling decided not to bother worring about G/H, since her fans didn't care in the first place, so not worth the effort."

From Can't Stand Extra Non-Book Information from JKR: Thread IV:

"quote:

So the idea that the Slytherins came back is one of the most annoying pieces of non-book information to come from Jo, to me personally.

I take it as Rowling is a Liar. I think she got the memo that Slytherin = Evil Death Eater is not popular like she must have thought it would be from Memerson, and tried to rewrite history. Even if it is NOT written on the page. It is NOT like Rowling rereads or checks her work. She is above that. Rather like Bushboy constantly trying to rewrite the Invasion of Iraq to make himself look good, rather than admit he was stupid to do it."

From Can't Stand Extra Non-Book Information from JKR: Thread V:

"Actually, what I Love about the whole Dumbledore is Gay but Asexual, so he is safe to have around kids, is that is rips off the likes of "Damage Control," among other FanFics where Dumbledore is gay, goes nuts and lots of people die horribly because Crazy Dumbledore is leading the resistance REALLY SLOWLY, and everyone thinks he knows what he is doing (Molly) no matter how insane he actually is or how many get killed that didn't need to because of Crazy Dumbledore. Dumbledore is crazy, so none of it is his fault.

Everyone who thinks Rowling mined FanFic to finish the last two books should probably get a cookie. And, since she did that, she now wants to be Umbridge, and close off all non-Ministry/Rowling approved fields of speculation with her interviews. Now that SHE is done writing the books, no non-Ministry Approved Thinking will be allowed. Who would have thought it? Rowling did write herself into Harry Potter, and she's Umbridge. Now THAT is funny!"

"If you read the sequel to "And Just Plain Wrong," namely "Damage Control" then you will have the basic Dumbledore plot for book seven. Namely, Dumbledore has gone mad "fighting" Voldemort, so he gets the notion that if Voldemort has physical contact with Harry long enough and often enough, it will kill him. Never mind that Voldemort will kill Harry LONG before that happens. So Dumbledore waits around letting everyone die horribly to see how long it will take his Stupid Plan to work. (Sounds like GW Bushboy doesn't?) I mean, the writer of "Damage Control" got Dumbledore Spot On. Namely he is so mad that he doesn't care who dies as long as he gets his way. They define Crazy as doing the same thing over and over again, thinking that you just might get a different result. I thought "And Just Plain Wrong" and "Damage Control" were the same basic plot as DH, only they had hard R ratings, and came out years before DH. I wonder who stole from who?"

Evil Snape and ladies'man Grindelwald

2008-10-22T16:47:22Z

Look at some non-H/Hr related stupidity from Hopedreamer, the author of "The Weasleys are the royal family" "theory" (JKR 'screwed up her own story & characters'?, Why do some readers think so?):

QUOTE
(Moogle)

QUOTE
(Kckaye)

QUOTE
(Moogle)

I dunno about you lot, but I never once thought Dumbledore was gay. I wouldn't really trust the "sensitive adults" either, considering a lot of those same people probably thought that Sirius and Remus were gay, as well as Harry, Ron and Draco.

I never saw Dumbledore as being gay either.

Glad I wasn't the only one who felt this way. I just never thought of him being romantically involved with anyone. It just didn't fit.

Maybe "smug adults" is more like it, Moogle. These people apparently prided themselves on their "adult" worldview -- on being too "sophisticated" to believe that living and unsterilized humans can be asexual in real life, and therefore on "knowing" only one possible reason why someone could reach the age Dumbledore reached without ever achieving marriage and parenthood.

The problem is that JKR set out in canon (if not quite spelling it out) a perfectly plausible alternate explanation, straight from the Phoenix's beak -- sort of:

QUOTE
(Bloomsbury/Raincoast edition, pp. 573-75)

"...You know the secret of my sister's ill health, what those Muggles did, what she became. You know how my poor father sought revenge, and paid the price, died in Azkaban. You know how my mother gave up her own life to care for Ariana.

"I resented it, Harry.

"...I was gifted. I was brilliant. I wanted to escape. I wanted to shine. I wanted glory.

"Do not misunderstand me. ...I loved them. I loved my parents, I loved my brother and sister, but I was selfish, Harry, more selfish than you, who are a remarkably selfless person, could possibly imagine.

"So that, when my mother died, and I was left the responsibility of a damaged sister and a wayward brother, I returned to my village in anger and bitterness. Trapped and wasted, I thought! And then, of course, he came...

"...Grindelwald. You cannot imagine how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me. Muggles forced into subservience. We wizards triumphant. Grindelwald and I, the glorious young leaders of the revolution.

"Oh, I had a few scruples. I assuaged my conscience with empty words. It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards. Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes. If the plans we were making came to fruition, all my dreams would come true.

"And at the heart of our schemes, the Deathly Hallows!

"...Invincible masters of death, Grindelwald and I. Two months of insanity, of cruel dreams, and neglect of the only two members of my family left to me.

"And then...you know what happened. Reality returned, in the form of my rough, unlettered, and infinitely more admirable brother. I did not want to hear the truths he shouted at me. I did not want to hear that I could not set forth to seek Hallows with a fragile and unstable sister in tow.

"The argument became a fight. Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprang into terrible being. And Ariana...after all my mother's care and caution...lay dead upon the floor.

"...Well, Grindelwald fled, as anyone but I could have predicted. He vanished, with his plans for seizing power, and his schemes for Muggle torture, and his dreams of the Deathly Hallows, dreams in which I had encouraged him and helped him. He ran, while I was left to bury my sister and learn to live with my guilt and my terrible grief, the price of my shame.

"Years passed. There were rumors about him. They said he had procured a wand of immense power. I, meanwhile, was offered the post of Minister for Magic, not once, but several times. Naturally, I refused. I had learned that I was not to be trusted with power...

"...I had proven, as a very young man, that power was my weakness and my temptation...

"...I was safer at Hogwarts. I think I was a good teacher --

"...But while I busied myself with the training of young wizards, Grindelwald was raising an army..."

Do you see it? Dumbledore went into teaching to atone for having mishandled his responsibilities toward his family of origin -- and for having let his ideals become briefly corrupted by Grindelwald. In this way, Hogwarts became his spouse, and its numerous students his children.

So doesn't this rather cast doubt on the idea of his death as a rough act of euthanasia he planned with Snape? Terminal illness or none, wouldn't this Dumbledore far more likely have opted to serve as Headmaster to the bitter end -- to go down fighting Voldemort himself, if necessary, in order to protect the only family he had? (Remember how, just before he and Harry went off to the cave, Dumbledore made a show of not knowingly leaving the castle unprotected.) Shortly after Dumbledore's death, Hagrid said of him, "No other Headmaster or Headmistress ever gave more to this school." If Dumbledore saw the school as his family, then that statement makes more sense now than ever.

By extension, am I the only one who's extremely skeptical about most of what the Pensieve presented to Harry as "The Prince's Tale"? Knowing how hazardous his continued association with Voldemort was, could Snape have wanted to leave something behind him to prevent Harry from knowing the truth about him -- such as a collection of memories of which some were true, others altered and still others entirely omitted? Remember that Harry never learned anything from Snape that Snape didn't want him to learn -- and never mind whether what Harry was to learn was truth or error.

For one thing, even supposing that Snape's amputation of George's ear was accidental, why would he have wanted to protect Remus? James (and Lily with him) died as the result of Snape passing information to Voldemort. Snape very likely used his Occlumency scam to rid himself of Sirius, using Harry as a pawn. (Shob and Silkymoonshine are two people I know to concur with me on this: they informed me as much by PM. How many others, whom I've never heard from, also agree?) So wouldn't he more likely have wanted to make it three-for-three, and maybe disguise his act as that of the Death Eater who allegedly got between him and Remus -- assuming, of course, that Snape didn't just add that person to the version of that memory he left for Harry?

Then, too, there's that first meeting of the Marauders -- and their first meeting with Snape -- on the Express. Had we been able to get Sirius's and/or Remus's memory thereof, might it have turned out, say, that Snape attracted the attention of the foursome by calling them weaklings and cowards -- and worse -- for favoring Gryffindor over Slytherin, and backed it up by, say, bringing their luggage crashing down on them? (Remember once again what Sirius said in Book Four about first-year Snape's knowledge of curses.) Who could blame Lily for fleeing the compartment after witnessing all of that? (Yet now we're being asked to believe that jealousy over Lily, rather than any aversion to the Dark Arts -- though, admittedly, the latter was more Sirius's forte because of his disreputable family -- drove James's enmity toward Snape.) And as Snape followed her out of there, did he put an Impediment Jinx on the Marauders to stop them from following him?

So where are the omitted memories, as well as the original versions of those Harry viewed (including a possible "restored" version of "Snape's Worst Memory")? Could they be in a heavily-sealed and threateningly-labeled bottle, possibly hidden behind some jars of slimy dead things in a certain office in the Hogwarts dungeons? And during his occupancy of said office, did Amycus Carrow:

1) never notice the bottle;

2) never consider it worth investigating; or

3) never dare to investigate it?

QUOTE
(Stella Octangula)

...There were people shipping GrindleDore since the carpet book leaked. Of course people will ship anything in this fandom.

As for "GrindleDore," I can buy that even less since JKR spelled out the nature of the relationship between these two a little more clearly:

QUOTE
(p. 572)

"It was the [Deathly Hallows], above all, that drew us together. Two clever, arrogant boys with a shared obsession..."

(p. 573)

"...You cannot imagine how [Grindelwald's] ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me. ...Grindelwald and I, the glorious young leaders of the revolution. ...It would all be for the greater good...Invincible masters of death, Grindelwald and I..."

Thus their bond appears to have been more intellectual and ideological than anything else. Could this really have been too boring -- or too naïve -- for adult readers?

You'll remember that in the print version of Book Four, both Beauxbatons and Durmstrang were coed. I for one believe that Grindelwald was not only straight but, before his expulsion from the latter school, quite the ladies' man around there. Can't you imagine him mentoring young Albus in that area -- the two of them becoming known as "lady-killers" around Godric's Hollow?

I for one am also still waiting for someone from Bloomsbury, Scholastic, Warner Bros., Christopher Little Literary Agency or Colman Getty P.R. Consultancy to come forward disputing JKR's claim that she's "always seen Dumbledore as gay."

What's that? "You for one are wasting your time: there's nothing to dispute, because she only told the truth"? Maybe; just maybe..."

And here rattlesnakeroot shares her thoughts on yaoi:

"One thing has been bothering me all day - what is it about "slapping" and JKR? She said she wanted to slap Snape "hard" and then, in that video clip from the special, she mentions that she told a fan about Dumbledore being gay she thought the woman was "going to slap me." She was very offended that a fan might not want to know about Dumbledore's sexual orientation.

Perhaps our dear author should ask herself if this information is pertinent to most readers? To the story it would seem to make no difference at all, because Dumbledore and Gellert could have been best friends, as James and Sirius were best friends, and Harry and Ron. Those male friendships do not have to be gay to be meaningful or emotional, and that is her own paradigm that is in the canon.

And here's another point: People love Dumbledore as a character, and for many people he may have reminded them of a father or their own grandfather. So it might come as a shock that he was gay. That does not mean those readers are homophobic, but merely surprised because they saw him a different way. Again, that goes to author's intention versus the interpretation of the reader."