Some more...

[swatkat]

And oh! msgenevieve is writing me Sirius/Remus! She is a goddess and you all must worship her. Also, write me stories, or else…

Since I'm spamming your flists anyway, might as well ramble a bit more. This is about female characters, and has something to do with this essay on Girl Power!!1111 in the HP books by mistful.



It's an excellent essay. I've read it twice or thrice, and I simply can't find a fault in mistful's logic. And still… there's something about the essay that I just cannot agree with, namely, the Girl Power bit. Because, because, each of these female characters that have been mentioned have their own set of flaws, their own set of failures, *and* their own set of good qualities which makes them so important to the story. So, had Hermione been a boy, would she all of a sudden become a very interesting character? Her Know-it-Allness would've suddenly become a very positive criterion, and all the issues that she has to deal with would've made her a Fascinating Hero instead of AnnoyinglyPerfect! Girl? (which she is not, BTW. Annoyingly perfect, that is.) Maybe I'm really missing the point here, but this essay (and the subsequent comments) make me very uneasy, because it is, in a way, calling all the girls I like one-dimensional Mary Sues, and yet I can't pick a fault in the logic. Maybe it's just me, with my usual leaning towards the female characters rather than the males (this is not to say I don't love the men. I do. A lot) that has coloured my thinking and is preventing me from seeing the light. After all, I did grow up in the age of Girl Power, so how the hell am I supposed to know? Blame it on the Spice Girls! *g*

Comments

[msgenevieve.livejournal.com]

Oh, you *are* naughty.

I supposed you think that if you post in public about that particular plot-bunny, I'll have to write it for you?

*shakes fist in the air, then dashes away to think about Sirius/Remus some more*

Hey

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

You do what you have to do, right? *g* I mean, no pressure. Take your time. I'll only nag you once everyday. Besides, I thought it might inspire some other people to write stories for me.

Swatkat

Weeeeeeell.....

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

I read the essay, and some of the comments, and it seems to me that there's *so* much canon material to work with, you could just as easily make the opposite case, and neither side would be "wrong".

What it boils down to, in my opinion, is that you have a female author who for reasons of marketability chose to make the main hero and main villain males, and is consciously or subconsciously trying to make up for it by creating a slew of female characters who are various types of overachievers in whatever supporting roles they play in the story. In the end, though, it's going to come down to a Battle of Good versus Evil between Harry and Voldemort. Everything else is mere prelude or accompaniment.

Interesting that she didn't include Cho in her discussion, other than a minor reference to her being "pretty." I'm sure that she could dredge up some argument to fit Cho into her theory, though, since she's obviously very determined.

Re: Weeeeeeell.....

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

What it boils down to, in my opinion, is that you have a female author who for reasons of marketability chose to make the main hero and main villain males, and is consciously or subconsciously trying to make up for it by creating a slew of female characters who are various types of overachievers in whatever supporting roles they play in the story. In the end, though, it's going to come down to a Battle of Good versus Evil between Harry and Voldemort. Everything else is mere prelude or accompaniment.

That's an excellent thought, actually - I didn't consider it that way. I'm not sure if it's unconsciously done, if that's the case, because JKR is usually aware quite aware about what she's writing. But the point that annoys me about the essay is that I don't quite see them as overachievers, really. Even Bellatrix and Hermione - probably the two strongest women (even though Bellatrix is nowhere near as developed a character as Hermione is) in the books - don't come across as particularly girl-powerish to me. There *are* girls who do well in their class, there *are* women who can be evil psycopaths, so what exactly is the problem? And is it for the sake of marketability that the hero is a boy, or is it simply because she imagined a boy-wizard named Harry Potter, who would become the Boy Who Lived?

The only character for whom the criticism fits is, probably, Ginny Weasley. Many people have found her sudden growth in OotP absurd (you'll know what I mean when you bother to read the books *g*), and quite unncessary. You can explain this by saying that the books are from Harry's perspective, and it's not Ginny that changes, but it's Harry's perspective of her that does. But I suspect this is where JKR was playing for the gallery, because I've chatted with a number of pre-teen and teenage fangirls (they think I'm so cool, lol!), and each of them agreed that Ginny Weasley rocks. But to judge every female character in the book in the same perspective seems quite absurd to me. *shrug*

Interesting that she didn't include Cho in her discussion, other than a minor reference to her being "pretty." I'm sure that she could dredge up some argument to fit Cho into her theory, though, since she's obviously very determined.

I'm not sure Cho would've fit the description, especially after OotP, where she messes up quite a bit. But you're right, maybe there are some arguments to fit this into the same theory as well.

Swatkat

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

I read the essay, and some of the comments, and it seems to me that there's *so* much canon material to work with, you could just as easily make the opposite case, and neither side would be "wrong".

You know, I've been thinking, and I'm not sure why I got so worked up about it. *blush* I mean, a good literary work - any good literary work - is bound to have millions of different interpretations, some accurate, some not so accurate, some absolutely contradictory to others but somehow managing to stick nonetheless. And considering that's what I've been *trained* to do, "Jane Austen was a feminist!" "No, she bloody well was
not!", I'm not sure why I even posted this. I guess it came across as attacking JKR (which she gets a lot, and makes the fangirl in me very angry), *and* my favourite girls (gender-biased?), and so I had to rise in protest. *g*

I still don't agree with what the essay says, though. :p

Swatkat

I followed the link -

[nell65.livejournal.com]

and while it was a fun read, I wasn't convinced by it. I haven't managed to read the fifth book yet, but I have read the others - and wasn't overwhelmed by the 'girl power' rrroxxx thing.

But - I might know why you got worked up - because I do to over things like this. I'm very sensitive to the way female characters are discussed, and this essay - intended or not - seemed to suggest that JKR's main female characters would be more 'believeable' in some way if they were stupider, less talented, and more generally incompetent at life. So the boys would look better, bascially.

Definitely the kind of thing to get my eyelid twitching. *g*

Because as Jaybee pointed out, there is plenty of information in the books that could be spun the other way. And really, until book FIVE for pete's sake!, Hermione was basically the *only* female character with any development at all. The rest had names and a few identifying charcteristics...but that's about it. I'm not not so dazzled by the female power thing here that I can't see perfectly well that the stakes in this world are determined by the boys, and that the boys will be playing for them.

I also don't see that Hermoine has been presented as some sort of flawless creature of pearless worth, any more than Harry has been. Because if you turned Hermonie into Henry - other than the Ron crush subplot - you wouldn't have to change much at all. He would simply be the geeky one of the trio....

Nell

Re: Weeeeeeell.....

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

I think the Girl Power term was poorly chosen, because it implies certain specific things that do *not* apply to many if not most of the characters she was discussing. What she was really arguing was not that they fit *that* archetype, but that for whatever reason, JKR seems to make her female characters better at whatever plot role they perform than *comparable* male characters.

I'm not sure I agree, but as I said, there's so much canon to play with, you could construct virtually any argument and find evidence to "prove" it.

I'm not sure Cho would've fit the description, especially after OotP, where she messes up quite a bit. But you're right, maybe there are some arguments to fit this into the same theory as well.

That's exactly my point. I don't think Cho fits the theory at all, and I think it's telling that the author chose to all but ignore her in the essay. But if pressed, I bet she could construct something to bring Cho into the fold, not because she's necessarily right, but because a determined person will *always* be able to find something in canon to support her argument.

Re: Weeeeeeell.....

[mscyanide.livejournal.com]

I'll just add that JKR has said that the Hermione character is loosely based upon herself.

Has she?!

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Oh, dear lord. *Holds head*

I can't say this actually surprises me, though.

Well...

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Very loosely, actually. She was asked which character best reminded her of herself, and she said it was probably Hermione, due to the geeky, know-it-all behaviour. Or did she say more?

Swatkat

Re: Well...

[jaybee65.livejournal.com]

Oh, if that's all it was, it's not quite as awful as I was thinking.

Still, though -- I don't think we're going to see Hermione killed in the end, are we? LOL.

Re: Well...

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

Still, though -- I don't think we're going to see Hermione killed in the end, are we? LOL.

Oh god, don't say it! You never know with JKR. I'm pretty darn sure she's going to kill Remus, and if Hermione dies too... *sniff*

Swatkat

JKR quotes...

[mscyanide.livejournal.com]

Q:Are any of your female characters, like Hermione, modeled after your own daughter?

A:No, if Hermione was based on anyone, she was based on me when I was younger. But my daughter is turning out to be a bit like me, so she is a bit like Hermione. :-)


Amazon.co.uk: Are your characters based on people you know?

Rowling: Some of them are, but I have to be extremely careful what I say about this. Mostly, real people inspire a character, but once they are inside your head they start turning into something quite different. Professor Snape and Gilderoy Lockhart both started as exaggerated versions of people I've met, but became rather different once I got them on the page. Hermione is a bit like me when I was 11, though much cleverer.

Q:What were you like as a little girl, Ms. Rowling? I am sure you had a great imagination. Did you believe in fairies and magic?

A:I don't believe in magic in the sense that I write about it, but I do believe that extraordinary things can happen in the world for which we don't yet have an explanation. I was a little bit like Hermione in the book when I was young. I wasn't as clever, and I really hope I wasn't as annoying. I did consciously base her on me when I was about 11.


Don't say I never go to the trouble to look things up for you. *bg*

Re: I followed the link -

[delle.livejournal.com]

I haven't followed the link, but I just had to post a "me too" to this comment of Nell's:

I'm not not so dazzled by the female power thing here that I can't see perfectly well that the stakes in this world are determined by the boys, and that the boys will be playing for them.

I love the HP stories, please don't get me wrong. But it has always seemed to me that the girls are only minor characters, with Hermione being the sole exception. We certainly get a better grasp of Snape's character, or even Gilderoy Lockhart's, than we do of Umbridge. Umbridge, it seemed to me, existed solely to be the Evil Wicked Witch. (But, then, I'm not a big fan of book 5. Have only read it once, which is quite unusual for me)

I'd really argue that the girls that appear are too perfect. And I'd CERTAINLY argue against the idea that what few girls appear need to be down-played to let the boys shine.

[swatkat24.livejournal.com]

But it has always seemed to me that the girls are only minor characters, with Hermione being the sole exception. We certainly get a better grasp of Snape's character, or even Gilderoy Lockhart's, than we do of Umbridge. Umbridge, it seemed to me, existed solely to be the Evil Wicked Witch.

I totally agree. Hermione, Dead!Lily, Molly Weasley to a certain extent, and maybe Luna and Tonks are the only female characters who really count.

Which book is your favourite, then? Mine is PoA, although I adore OotP too. *g*

Swatkat