![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
I didn't want to take up any more of the thread in terri's post, or make other commentators there uncomfortable, so I've moved my reply here.
ETA to avoid any misunderstanding: THIS IS NOT A STAND-ALONE ESSAY. It is a REPLY to a long discussion on terri's Remus as Parent post. Please, if you think something is missing or unclear, please read back in the discussion to be sure, for the sake of avoiding misunderstandings. Link is
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snaped
Thank you.
There are a couple of points I want to make, sailorlum. I was trying not to tl;dr but I did it again. Sorry. :( Thank you for not taking my rantiness personally.
The first point that occurs to me reading your response is "how could Remus NOT assume he'd be traumatized to some degree?" Not, let me be clear, that Remus ought to be able to judge the specific degree of it to a millimeter. Just that, knowing the *fact* that Severus had nearly lost his life to a werewolf, Remus could reasonably be expected to assume that maybe Severus might have a less than enthusiastic response to living in the same castle as the werewolf again, and that this would need to be respected and addressed somehow.
And no, Severus wouldn't have cried about it in front of everyone. That's not the point. It's a normal, standard human reaction to deeply impacted by such a near miss, even if you don’t talk about it constantly. So much that we would consider abnormal someone who *wasn't.*
But. People do heal, yes. Usually, after such a near miss, when they have a good deal of support and counseling and time. Which Severus didn't have. But, as you point out, Remus hadn't been in contact with him (as far as we know) for over a decade. He wouldn’t necessarily *know* he still hurts. Ok. Maybe he thought Severus had gotten over it? Let's start over, again assuming the best. Let's assume Remus did not *know* how traumatized Severus really was. I'll do more that take that as my new starting point, I'll grant you without retraction that, up through the end of that scene, it's as possible/valid as the reading that he did *know.* As you say, he hadn't been in contact with Severus in years. So you’ve adjusted my thinking with that.
But. My second point, after having considered how your point affects my previous argument: What did he do, upon returning to Hogwarts and encountering Severus again? Did he (from the indications in the text), in re-establishing his relationship to Severus, attempt to discern how the man really felt, now that he was present? (Regardless of how Severus might have responded, did Remus *try*)? Did he give an indication of considering *the possibility* that Severus, still wary and suspicious of him, might be reacting to the presence of the werewolf who nearly mauled him? That is, did he even once attempt to put himself in Severus' shoes and think about the *possibility* that the man was still suffering?
No. He made *assumptions* about Severus. He *assumed* that Severus either was not traumatized (as a normal person would have been) or that he was over it. There is no sign in the text that he attempted to get confirmation of this fact from Severus, no sign that he ever accorded Severus the human respect of *asking* him how he felt. Even if Severus wouldn't have responded well, that's not the point - Remus had a duty to think of the situation from Severus' POV for a moment rather than make assumptions about the feelings and state of mind of another person regarding a life-threatening incident.
His failure here is exactly the same at base as if he had *known* for certain. He failed to accord Severus the human respect of thinking of him as a separate person who can feel pain, who has his own POV on things, and whose pain *matters.* He failed to consider Severus' possible pain as real or *worthy of thought* - whether he knew for certain that Severus was in pain or whether it was merely possible that he was, based on a normal person's reactions to things. He did not think of the mere possibility that Severus might hurt as something *he needed to investigate,* however minimally. He assumed. And acted, on the basis of that assumption, to deny and invalidate Severus' pain when he was brought face to face with it - regardless of motive or of his conscious awareness that that was what he was doing.
People are often emotionally dumb, as you put it, and far far too often fail in exactly this way. They fail to think of other people as truly, fully *human* beings who feel pain and have their own perspectives. It's a very very common failing, and I do not exclude myself from that. It is also, most of the time, not a particularly conscious failing. That still does not excuse it. It may be human to fail in this way - I'm not saying Remus is the worst person in the world for failing like this. He’s not Voldemort, and he has positive traits. But it is a failing, and I won't let him off the hook for it even when I assume the best motives.
Regarding your argument that he later realized what he'd done and tried to make up for it...well, perhaps it holds in the moment. No longer. It doesn't actually impact his behavior - because he again fails to respect Severus' pain even after this incident. He again makes Severus track him down with the potion at the last minute. And we get words from his own lips, that second evening, that confirm that he *still* does not think Severus' pain (which, in your argument, he was now conscious of) worthy of regard. He is still failing to respect Severus as a human being that evening. Because, having seen that Severus is indeed still traumatized and hurting, he explicitly tells Severus *to his face* that he needs to get over it, that it is just "a schoolboy grudge." Here it's not a question of not realizing Severus was hurt; Remus (now) knows he's hurt. He simply thinks, and says, that Severus has no *right* to be hurt. He trivializes the impact of a life-threatening encounter, to the man's face. Severus' pain *does not matter to him.*
As you say, Remus certainly minimized the Prank in his own mind. That is precisely my point, overall. He minimized another person's life-threatening experience, and in so doing necessarily minimized the meaningfulness of that person’s pain. An action which, conscious and deliberate or not, is a step towards dehumanization. And he continued to do this even after seeing for himself that the person was still hurting. You can argue that, before the tussle over the potion, it was merely a failure to do his human duty and consider things, not a deliberate act. I...don’t entirely agree with that reading, but it’s certainly possible. But after that encounter he ought to have realized and acted, but he did not. And in the Shack, when he explicitly acknowledged and then dismissed Severus’ pain to the man’s face, it utterly ceased to be a passive failure. At that point, if not before, it was willful refusal. A refusal we never see him apologize for, nor recant. - Had he repented and changed, that we could see, I would not come down so hard on him. I would also be more willing to accept arguments that it was unconscious, passive failure most of the time, such as in the first tussle over the potion. The fact that he never significantly alters his attitude or behavior (speech is another thing) that we see inclines me to read it as a consistent aspect of his character, not an unconscious failing he’d likely repent once awoken to it.
See, I understand that you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that you like him and want a flawed but human Remus. Of course that’s your right. Even more than that, I agree that he *is* flawed but human. He is not Voldemort, and does have good points. He’s willing to risk his life to defeat Voldemort, for one thing. He’s loyal to his friends (for better or worse). For those in his pack, he does care, even if he is not always perfect about fulfilling his responsibilities to them. He wants to make the WW a better place. And he suffers, yes, decidedly, and sometimes beyond anything deserved. But he has his flaws. This is exactly my point. He has flaws, and these are his flaws. He can be insensitive to other people. He has recurring moments of moral cowardice that he repeatedly gives into. And if you aren’t in his pack (like Severus), he can fail to accord you the respect due another human being, at times willfully. The *reasons* for these failings, and his various motives at any point in time, may add shades of grey, but they don’t excuse his behavior towards Severus. Perhaps we see him at his worst with Severus. If you want to grant him that, I’ll go along with it. It’s these complexities that make characters fascinating to me - and I am fascinated by Lupin, even if I *like* him less and less with time.
I don’t mean to pick on Remus. None of the characters in the books are shining angels, Severus included. But I tend, personally, to point out the flaws in seemingly-blameless characters like Remus, and to emphasize the pain of those like Severus who are discarded by other characters, for a reason. If we go along with the bias that the narrative voice, and JKR’s pronouncements, encourage and tolerate or cover over failings like the one I’ve described because the characters are otherwise sympathetic to us, we fall into a trap that IMHO is very, very dangerous. The books encourage us (in behavior) NOT to think of other people as human beings unless we *like* them, or if they are close to us in some way. The people who might seem unpleasant - bitter, or pompous (Percy), or what have you - are shoved off to the side, and we are encouraged to distinguish between our & our friends’ pain (real, terrible, worthy of vengeance) and the pain of people we don’t particularly like (exaggerated, they need to get over it, they have no right to criticize US). When, IMHO, it is our human duty to at least try to put ourselves in other people’s shoes even for a moment, to respect a fundamental baseline humanity in every person. When a character fails at exactly this, and the narrative either whitewashes it or *encourages* us to go along with it, I hit the brakes. (And, obviously, go tl;dr on everyone. ;) ) It’s a common failing that I’m sure I’ve been guilty of myself, but when I am conscious of it I won’t tolerate it. And I see it in these books.
Which is why I’m not letting go of your argument. Not that you are consciously doing this, not at all. I understand that you sympathize with Remus, and have your own reading of the books - totally fine and your right. And maybe I’m taking it more seriously than you want to - I tend to get really serious about these things, maybe because I’m a lit student. :) But it seems to me that your argument is still...not really acknowledging the real failing that I see here, nor satisfactorily explaining away the evidence that leads me to see that failing. Really damning IMHO is Remus’ comment in the Shack, and the fact that in the scene before Severus *twice* drew his attention to the potion. Even with your argument that Remus wasn’t aware at first of Severus’ pain, after the potion incident he ought to have realized his failing and acted to change it (knowing and not acting being another kind of failure). But he didn’t. And even if at that point it was not a deliberate *refusal* to see, it was still a *failure* to consider - a passive fault rather than an active one, but very real nonetheless. I’m not asking Remus to be a mind-reader (at least, not anymore. I grant I hadn’t considered the years apart. But he still can be faulted IMHO for assuming rather than considering Severus’ possible POV.) I’m asking him to stop and think of Severus as a real human being for a moment, and act in consideration of that. Something I think every person has a duty to do towards others (and which just about every character in the series, Severus included, at times fails to do). Which Remus repeatedly fails to do. And...I don’t see how your argument acknowledges/gets rid of that lack of consideration here. Which is slightly frustrating for me - I feel like we’re talking past each other. :( Your arguments acknowledge that Remus has his flaws, but discount or explain away every concrete instance of those flaws, which makes the acknowledgment seem hollow.
So how about this, to be fair to you. If, after all this debating, I still haven’t convinced you....Why don’t you give me a couple of concrete instances in which you see Remus really, really failing? What are his worst moments, to you? And I mean tell me in detail - don’t worry about tl;dr. :) The things that you, personally, *can’t* bring yourself to explain away, make light of, or give him the benefit of the doubt on? You say (earlier) that Remus can be passive-aggressive towards Severus, just that the potions scene isn’t an example of it. So what WOULD be an example of it? Give me some real dirt. Convince me that we really do have two very different interpretations of the character, including where his real flaws are. If you don’t want to fill up the thread here, make a separate post or email me - moviemaedchen@gmail.com
If you want to, of course. Obviously this stops having a point when you start to not enjoy it, and I don’t want to wear you out. Sometimes (like Severus), I have a hard time letting go of something. ;) But I do genuinely enjoy debating with you, and if you haven’t convinced me of your reading in toto you’ve still made me consider things from different POVs, and taking more things into account. Which IMO any good debate should do, for all involved. It helps strengthen skill at reasoning, always a good thing, right? :) I thought the Lily thing went pretty well, am I right? I hope I’m not upsetting you, and that I haven’t slipped up somewhere and said something about you personally rather than your argument. I know you really don’t like that, and I can be sensitive that way myself, so I’ve done my best to keep it about the argument. Please correct me if I have - or if I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.
Thanks for reading and responding to all this. Wow, tl;dr to the tenth degree. *sigh*
ETA to avoid any misunderstanding: THIS IS NOT A STAND-ALONE ESSAY. It is a REPLY to a long discussion on terri's Remus as Parent post. Please, if you think something is missing or unclear, please read back in the discussion to be sure, for the sake of avoiding misunderstandings. Link is
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snaped
Thank you.
There are a couple of points I want to make, sailorlum. I was trying not to tl;dr but I did it again. Sorry. :( Thank you for not taking my rantiness personally.
The first point that occurs to me reading your response is "how could Remus NOT assume he'd be traumatized to some degree?" Not, let me be clear, that Remus ought to be able to judge the specific degree of it to a millimeter. Just that, knowing the *fact* that Severus had nearly lost his life to a werewolf, Remus could reasonably be expected to assume that maybe Severus might have a less than enthusiastic response to living in the same castle as the werewolf again, and that this would need to be respected and addressed somehow.
And no, Severus wouldn't have cried about it in front of everyone. That's not the point. It's a normal, standard human reaction to deeply impacted by such a near miss, even if you don’t talk about it constantly. So much that we would consider abnormal someone who *wasn't.*
But. People do heal, yes. Usually, after such a near miss, when they have a good deal of support and counseling and time. Which Severus didn't have. But, as you point out, Remus hadn't been in contact with him (as far as we know) for over a decade. He wouldn’t necessarily *know* he still hurts. Ok. Maybe he thought Severus had gotten over it? Let's start over, again assuming the best. Let's assume Remus did not *know* how traumatized Severus really was. I'll do more that take that as my new starting point, I'll grant you without retraction that, up through the end of that scene, it's as possible/valid as the reading that he did *know.* As you say, he hadn't been in contact with Severus in years. So you’ve adjusted my thinking with that.
But. My second point, after having considered how your point affects my previous argument: What did he do, upon returning to Hogwarts and encountering Severus again? Did he (from the indications in the text), in re-establishing his relationship to Severus, attempt to discern how the man really felt, now that he was present? (Regardless of how Severus might have responded, did Remus *try*)? Did he give an indication of considering *the possibility* that Severus, still wary and suspicious of him, might be reacting to the presence of the werewolf who nearly mauled him? That is, did he even once attempt to put himself in Severus' shoes and think about the *possibility* that the man was still suffering?
No. He made *assumptions* about Severus. He *assumed* that Severus either was not traumatized (as a normal person would have been) or that he was over it. There is no sign in the text that he attempted to get confirmation of this fact from Severus, no sign that he ever accorded Severus the human respect of *asking* him how he felt. Even if Severus wouldn't have responded well, that's not the point - Remus had a duty to think of the situation from Severus' POV for a moment rather than make assumptions about the feelings and state of mind of another person regarding a life-threatening incident.
His failure here is exactly the same at base as if he had *known* for certain. He failed to accord Severus the human respect of thinking of him as a separate person who can feel pain, who has his own POV on things, and whose pain *matters.* He failed to consider Severus' possible pain as real or *worthy of thought* - whether he knew for certain that Severus was in pain or whether it was merely possible that he was, based on a normal person's reactions to things. He did not think of the mere possibility that Severus might hurt as something *he needed to investigate,* however minimally. He assumed. And acted, on the basis of that assumption, to deny and invalidate Severus' pain when he was brought face to face with it - regardless of motive or of his conscious awareness that that was what he was doing.
People are often emotionally dumb, as you put it, and far far too often fail in exactly this way. They fail to think of other people as truly, fully *human* beings who feel pain and have their own perspectives. It's a very very common failing, and I do not exclude myself from that. It is also, most of the time, not a particularly conscious failing. That still does not excuse it. It may be human to fail in this way - I'm not saying Remus is the worst person in the world for failing like this. He’s not Voldemort, and he has positive traits. But it is a failing, and I won't let him off the hook for it even when I assume the best motives.
Regarding your argument that he later realized what he'd done and tried to make up for it...well, perhaps it holds in the moment. No longer. It doesn't actually impact his behavior - because he again fails to respect Severus' pain even after this incident. He again makes Severus track him down with the potion at the last minute. And we get words from his own lips, that second evening, that confirm that he *still* does not think Severus' pain (which, in your argument, he was now conscious of) worthy of regard. He is still failing to respect Severus as a human being that evening. Because, having seen that Severus is indeed still traumatized and hurting, he explicitly tells Severus *to his face* that he needs to get over it, that it is just "a schoolboy grudge." Here it's not a question of not realizing Severus was hurt; Remus (now) knows he's hurt. He simply thinks, and says, that Severus has no *right* to be hurt. He trivializes the impact of a life-threatening encounter, to the man's face. Severus' pain *does not matter to him.*
As you say, Remus certainly minimized the Prank in his own mind. That is precisely my point, overall. He minimized another person's life-threatening experience, and in so doing necessarily minimized the meaningfulness of that person’s pain. An action which, conscious and deliberate or not, is a step towards dehumanization. And he continued to do this even after seeing for himself that the person was still hurting. You can argue that, before the tussle over the potion, it was merely a failure to do his human duty and consider things, not a deliberate act. I...don’t entirely agree with that reading, but it’s certainly possible. But after that encounter he ought to have realized and acted, but he did not. And in the Shack, when he explicitly acknowledged and then dismissed Severus’ pain to the man’s face, it utterly ceased to be a passive failure. At that point, if not before, it was willful refusal. A refusal we never see him apologize for, nor recant. - Had he repented and changed, that we could see, I would not come down so hard on him. I would also be more willing to accept arguments that it was unconscious, passive failure most of the time, such as in the first tussle over the potion. The fact that he never significantly alters his attitude or behavior (speech is another thing) that we see inclines me to read it as a consistent aspect of his character, not an unconscious failing he’d likely repent once awoken to it.
See, I understand that you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, that you like him and want a flawed but human Remus. Of course that’s your right. Even more than that, I agree that he *is* flawed but human. He is not Voldemort, and does have good points. He’s willing to risk his life to defeat Voldemort, for one thing. He’s loyal to his friends (for better or worse). For those in his pack, he does care, even if he is not always perfect about fulfilling his responsibilities to them. He wants to make the WW a better place. And he suffers, yes, decidedly, and sometimes beyond anything deserved. But he has his flaws. This is exactly my point. He has flaws, and these are his flaws. He can be insensitive to other people. He has recurring moments of moral cowardice that he repeatedly gives into. And if you aren’t in his pack (like Severus), he can fail to accord you the respect due another human being, at times willfully. The *reasons* for these failings, and his various motives at any point in time, may add shades of grey, but they don’t excuse his behavior towards Severus. Perhaps we see him at his worst with Severus. If you want to grant him that, I’ll go along with it. It’s these complexities that make characters fascinating to me - and I am fascinated by Lupin, even if I *like* him less and less with time.
I don’t mean to pick on Remus. None of the characters in the books are shining angels, Severus included. But I tend, personally, to point out the flaws in seemingly-blameless characters like Remus, and to emphasize the pain of those like Severus who are discarded by other characters, for a reason. If we go along with the bias that the narrative voice, and JKR’s pronouncements, encourage and tolerate or cover over failings like the one I’ve described because the characters are otherwise sympathetic to us, we fall into a trap that IMHO is very, very dangerous. The books encourage us (in behavior) NOT to think of other people as human beings unless we *like* them, or if they are close to us in some way. The people who might seem unpleasant - bitter, or pompous (Percy), or what have you - are shoved off to the side, and we are encouraged to distinguish between our & our friends’ pain (real, terrible, worthy of vengeance) and the pain of people we don’t particularly like (exaggerated, they need to get over it, they have no right to criticize US). When, IMHO, it is our human duty to at least try to put ourselves in other people’s shoes even for a moment, to respect a fundamental baseline humanity in every person. When a character fails at exactly this, and the narrative either whitewashes it or *encourages* us to go along with it, I hit the brakes. (And, obviously, go tl;dr on everyone. ;) ) It’s a common failing that I’m sure I’ve been guilty of myself, but when I am conscious of it I won’t tolerate it. And I see it in these books.
Which is why I’m not letting go of your argument. Not that you are consciously doing this, not at all. I understand that you sympathize with Remus, and have your own reading of the books - totally fine and your right. And maybe I’m taking it more seriously than you want to - I tend to get really serious about these things, maybe because I’m a lit student. :) But it seems to me that your argument is still...not really acknowledging the real failing that I see here, nor satisfactorily explaining away the evidence that leads me to see that failing. Really damning IMHO is Remus’ comment in the Shack, and the fact that in the scene before Severus *twice* drew his attention to the potion. Even with your argument that Remus wasn’t aware at first of Severus’ pain, after the potion incident he ought to have realized his failing and acted to change it (knowing and not acting being another kind of failure). But he didn’t. And even if at that point it was not a deliberate *refusal* to see, it was still a *failure* to consider - a passive fault rather than an active one, but very real nonetheless. I’m not asking Remus to be a mind-reader (at least, not anymore. I grant I hadn’t considered the years apart. But he still can be faulted IMHO for assuming rather than considering Severus’ possible POV.) I’m asking him to stop and think of Severus as a real human being for a moment, and act in consideration of that. Something I think every person has a duty to do towards others (and which just about every character in the series, Severus included, at times fails to do). Which Remus repeatedly fails to do. And...I don’t see how your argument acknowledges/gets rid of that lack of consideration here. Which is slightly frustrating for me - I feel like we’re talking past each other. :( Your arguments acknowledge that Remus has his flaws, but discount or explain away every concrete instance of those flaws, which makes the acknowledgment seem hollow.
So how about this, to be fair to you. If, after all this debating, I still haven’t convinced you....Why don’t you give me a couple of concrete instances in which you see Remus really, really failing? What are his worst moments, to you? And I mean tell me in detail - don’t worry about tl;dr. :) The things that you, personally, *can’t* bring yourself to explain away, make light of, or give him the benefit of the doubt on? You say (earlier) that Remus can be passive-aggressive towards Severus, just that the potions scene isn’t an example of it. So what WOULD be an example of it? Give me some real dirt. Convince me that we really do have two very different interpretations of the character, including where his real flaws are. If you don’t want to fill up the thread here, make a separate post or email me - moviemaedchen@gmail.com
If you want to, of course. Obviously this stops having a point when you start to not enjoy it, and I don’t want to wear you out. Sometimes (like Severus), I have a hard time letting go of something. ;) But I do genuinely enjoy debating with you, and if you haven’t convinced me of your reading in toto you’ve still made me consider things from different POVs, and taking more things into account. Which IMO any good debate should do, for all involved. It helps strengthen skill at reasoning, always a good thing, right? :) I thought the Lily thing went pretty well, am I right? I hope I’m not upsetting you, and that I haven’t slipped up somewhere and said something about you personally rather than your argument. I know you really don’t like that, and I can be sensitive that way myself, so I’ve done my best to keep it about the argument. Please correct me if I have - or if I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.
Thanks for reading and responding to all this. Wow, tl;dr to the tenth degree. *sigh*
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snaped
It's part of a longer thread though, so reading back a bit might be helpful.
But - what is tl;dr? All these acronyms drive me mad!
I really cannot understand how he can react that way to Snape's trauma without remembering his own. -- Hwyla
Thank you for your comments. I agree that it is one of the dangers of the books - particularly since it slides you into that position while you're reading it so easily, and makes it so attractive. Many people in fandom still seem a bit caught up it in, I think. It's also depressingly common in ordinary real life - we all, I think, can fall into it a bit if we don't watch ourselves.
I do sympathize with Remus on some things - obviously he doesn't deserve to be discriminated against due to his condition, assuming proper precautions are taken. And having friends clearly meant a lot to him. He's very human.
part I
I've always been annoyed with the fact that so many people think that Lupin's lycantropy is somehow a metafore for AIDS while it is so clearly not.
Werewolves turn into slavering, murderous MONSTERS that actively seek victims to rip apart. AIDS patients do not. Werewolves (at least Fenrir, the most werewolfy of them all) seem to target children to pass their 'disease' onto, AIDS patients do not, and especially not on purpose.
What lycanthropy most resembles, to me, is pedofilia. Yes. I know this will make people scream. How dare I liken dear, gentle Remus Lupin with a childdiddler?! Well, face it, most pedophiles are perfectly friendly, dealing out the charm and chocolates, especially to that one lone child from the neglected home. Taking him apart, being all sympathetic like, building up a trust.. only to turn into a slavering monster when the moon rises... um, well.
People refer to pedophilia as a disease as well, and there are medicines to suppress libido.
So, in that light, lets review those chapters in PoA again.
Remus Lupin was the one who groomed and then assaulted young Sev when he was at school. His clothes were ripped off, he was pinned down, and nearly got raped, feeling Lupin's hot breath in his face.
The matter was hushed up, because the headmaster knew of Lupin's 'condition' and his and his protoge's reputation was more important to him than the ragamuffin from the neglected home. Snape should just forget about it, there's a good boy.
Years later, when Snape is a teacher, Lupin comes to teach as well. He objects. A pedo teaching in a boarding school?! That's tying the cat onto the bacon! But no, the Headmaster essures him he has medicine which will curb Lupin's libido and make him harmless. Snape himself is charged to dole out the meds to his one-time-near-rapist every moth.
Lupin soon makes himself friendly with the children, doling out chocolate, lampooning authority figures such as Snape himself and insists on addressing Snape with his Christian name, as if they are old school friends, which they are certainly not. When Snape snarls at him to keep him at a distance, butter wouldn't melt in Lupins mouth. Oh, some people are just *so* snarky. *sigh* Snape keeps an eye on him, though, because he doesn't trust Lupin to take his medicine, and he *is* in a school full of young children.
One time, when Snape comes to Lupin's rooms to give him his medicine, he finds him in the company of another dark-haired young boy from a neglecful family, but Lupin just smiles at him ("just showing him my grindylow, Severus") and waves him away, telling him that he *will* take his medicine, just not *now*, thank you very much.
TBC
part II
Yes, I know that a lot of you will scream, "no, no! Lupin is not a kiddie-winkler! He isn't a rapist! He's a very nice man!", but I just want you to remind you of the lesson Red Riding Hood learned. As she sang in 'Into the Woods', "nice is different from good".
Yes, Lupin is a 'victim' of his own condition as well, but the same can be said for pedofiles. Most pedo's will manfully fight their predeliction and never harm a child, since they know their urges to be wrong. Lupin always struck me as someone who didn't want to acknowledge the danger he presented, and this is exactly which makes him so dangerous. "Oh, poor me", he exhumes, "I'm such a victim of all this prejudice, and what did I do to deserve it, I ask you? Well, yes, I have a 'furry problem' (doesn't that sound cutesy?) and there were all those near-misses where I nearly gruesomely ripped people up in shivering little bits, but those were just larks! Pranks, nothing more! And yes, I once nearly ripped old Snape a new hole, but hey, he was just this grotty, neglected weirdo, and he was one of, you know, *those* people, so he doesn't count."
Nice? 'Very human'? Lupin? *brrrr...*
O_o
The books encourage us (in behavior) NOT to think of other people as human beings unless we *like* them, or if they are close to us in some way.
I disagree that the books are doing this or that JKR is doing this. I've heard the arguments, and I'm unconvinced. Anyone who feels encouraged by HP/JKR to not think of other people as human beings unless liked, is missing the point of the books, IMO. [I thought some of the big points were "love is the best virtue", "down with racism", "unpleasant people can be on the side of good", "good people can have big flaws", "choice is important", and "redemption is possible"]
Also, I'm not doing what you think the books are encouraging, either, and I do not care for the insinuation that that I'm falling into some "trap" or something.
We will have to just agree to disagree on these points.
I understand that you sympathize with Remus, and have your own reading of the books - totally fine and your right.
If you understand this, then why did you bother insinuating that I'm subconsciously falling into some trap? Why even go there?
I hope I’m not upsetting you, and that I haven’t slipped up somewhere and said something about you personally rather than your argument. I know you really don’t like that, and I can be sensitive that way myself, so I’ve done my best to keep it about the argument. Please correct me if I have - or if I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.
Well, I'm not pleased. I'm sure that wasn't your intent. I do appreciate that you mean no ill will. Things went well for us with the Lily thing (although I was tired by the end). For some reason, the system broke down, with Remus, so to speak.
Here's a tip for the future: Trying to guess where I "went wrong" in my reading, will not be well met. No good has ever come of that. Anyone who's tried has only wound up getting *me* wrong in a way I find insulting.
Also, fair warning: I will never take the books as seriously as you do. Fictional literature is art, first and foremost, to me. Trying to get me to take fic lit as seriously as you do, will not be well met.
*response in old thread that deals with the actual meta* although it all may be rendered moot by the chasm of difference in our basic views:
http://asylums.insanejournal.com/snaped
Re: O_o
* Terri, I think, had an excellent essay on this. To sum up one of the main points that bugs me, it is CANON that Harry is praised for a behavior for which the Death Eaters are rightly condemned.
And yes, I do take literature very seriously. Especially literature meant for children - it is my field. (I am a teen librarian.) Especially when the author has been at great pains to emphasize that she is writing moral books with a Christian meaning. I can discern no such morality, and no such meaning, in them.
The rehabilitation of Slytherin
I partly disagree with this. Where in the Epilogue are we shown that bullying of Slytherins is 'still a routinely accepted behaviour'?
That Slytherins are (sadly) still regarded with suspicion is confirmed by Ron's breezy remarks. Now, I don't take Ron's views very seriously -- Ron just doesn't think about things all that deeply, IMO, and his anti-Slytherin remarks are not so much malicious as thoughtless (which is Ron all over. He's not a bad bloke, just not a deep one).
And surely Harry's remarks to little Al show a new, improved attitude on Harry's part towards Slytherin. He says to Al that it doesn't matter to him what House he is sorted into. Plus there's the fact that Harry named his youngest son after a Slytherin headmaster as well as a Gryffindor one ... 'probably the bravest man Harry ever knew'. (And probably my favourite line in all of DH!)
As for the criticism of the morality in Rowling's books, well, I've read some pretty harsh things about the Chronicles of Narnia. And I love the Narnia books! I can overlook what some see as Lewis's black-and-white, preachy Christian morality because I too am a Christian and share Lewis's worldview but mainly I ignore the harsher Narnia critique because, in my opinion, Lewis is just a really great storyteller. :)
-- pearlette
Re: O_o
Speak for yourself, please.
The only thing the books might make me complicit in is deforestation (think of all the trees!, esp. for GoF), LOL. <----*attempt to add levity*
If you or sevvie or anyone else wants to take lit very seriously, that's your right (just as it's my right to not take lit quite so seriously).
As for Slytherin, it's the House of the privileged and elite pure-bloods. Granted, being Slytherin is also a double edged sword (due to mistrust and bias from other Houses), and I don't like how the House unity thing never happened... :( However I would say that it is certain Slytherins who are bullied in the book, not the House as a whole (and Slytherin has it's share of bullies, too), IMO. I just take a kind of moderate view, here. YMMV.
As for Harry and his Crucio of Amycus Carrow, I don't like that at all. That (and McGonagall waving it off) was a moment of Moral Dissonance that I could have done without. Having said that, Harry's and Minvera's moral failure in that scene doesn't compel me to throw away all their redeeming qualities. I can forgive them for their flaws (just like I can with Severus, Lupin and, yes, even Dumbledore), because I think they are ultimately good hearted (some of them are very messed up and/or morally ambiguous, but ultimately good hearted nonetheless). No one is perfect. And forgive doesn't mean excuse, btw.
Re: O_o
Well, those are supposed to be the intended big points, except Rowling shows us the opposite. The person who talks most about love has no idea what it means to love someone, definitely not someone who is alive and accessible and who needs him. The person who is supposed to have the power of love in large quantities only shows it to a select few, and his relationship with even his closest friends are hopelessly tilted (what does Harry know of Hermione's life? how much does he care about Hermione or even Ron, other than wanting them to be available to him?); he treats Neville, Luna and Ernie like pets, anyone who doubts him like villains and anyone he dislikes like scum or worse - to the point that he ends up torturing an enemy.
The anti-racism message doesn't work because of the attitude to Muggles, which is adopted even by a Muggle-born witch. (And it is diminished further by the interviews if we accept them, because according to the interviews the Potterverse racists are correct - Muggleborns really do have magical ancestors and Muggles can do some kind of disastrous magic with stolen wands. Another reason to ignore interviews.) If we apply Rowling's version of anti-racism it would be analogous to saying members of group X are inferior to members of group Y and deserve to be treated as less than humans by the Ys, except for those who are born to X parents but can pass for Ys.
Choice - not really, choice only tells the world what you were already since before you were born. (Or before you turned 11.) That is the meaning of what Twinkles says in COS.
And the only redemption she offers is death, which is no redemption at all.
Re: O_o
'how much does he care about Hermione or even Ron'
Enough to die for them (and everyone else in Hogwarts), as I would have thought DH made pretty clear.
'only shows it to a select few'
I may be beating a dead horse here, but forgiving an (entirely willing) accomplice to your parents' murder takes character.
'torturing an enemy'
An enemy who had spent a year torturing his friends, and had just suggested using schoolchildren as scapegoats for Voldemort's anger.
'treats Neville, Luna and Ernie like pets'...I'm not even gonna touch this one. night_train_fm
Re: O_o
We'll just have to agree to disagree, there. And I take a much more moderate view than the ones you've expressed, so we'll have to agree to disagree on much else, as well.
There *is* some Moral Dissonance in HP...However, I feel uncompelled to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.
And the only redemption she offers is death, which is no redemption at all.
Severus was on Redemption Road since 1981. I would say he was redeemed by his Heel Face Turn and by continuing to go along on the road of redemption. At the time of his death, he was a redeemed fellow (still with many serious issues, but redeemed in the big scheme of things, I think). His death wasn't meant to redeem him, it was just very, very unfortunate. I'm confident that Severus wasn't damned. IMO. YMMV.
Re: O_o
(And you are offended by having this pointed out, which just leaves me baffled.)
It is not Harry's ability to love (which is rather limited) that saves the day; it is his blood - his pureblood Potter/Peverell ancestry and Gaunt/Peverell Horcrux-infusion - which befits him to own the Hallows. No one in the Potterverse "loves" the people outside hir own circle. Harry's distant towards even his closest friends.
Racism is a subset of prejudice: judging the individual by the group s/he belongs to. JK encourages prejudiced thinking; she merely chooses the targets, eg purebloods.
*Everyone* in the Potterverse is racist towards Muggles, whether maliciously or patronisingly, and the effect on Muggles is uniformly deleterious, whether actively (Obliviation, Confunding, altering their home or living conditions without consent) or passively (not letting them know to defend themselves or be wary of a raised wand). The analogy is far from perfect, but neither farmer nor slaughterer have the *hen's* benefit in mind, although the latter houses and feeds and breeds her.
Unpleasant people are always on the side of bad unless their broken hearts teach them otherwise - and they shouldn't expect ever to be forgiven or have a moment's happiness.
Good people's flaws are forgivable or even praiseworthy, like Harry's "gallant" Crucio for spitting. It's horribly wrong and disloyal to suppose, just because a *good guy* blabs secrets (Sirius, Hagrid), that you can't trust him with yours.
Choice is a purely mechanical process whereby you show what sort of person you were born as.
Redemption doesn't include forgiveness, recognition or life; just be satisfied they stop blackening your name.
duj
To devil's advocate for a moment, I've frequently seen the same done with Severus, on this community and elsewhere.
I hope my tone is not sharp - I am not having the best day and it can be hard to judge one's tone correctly when one is in an overall negative mood. I'm not dinging you, I'm honestly puzzled. Sorry.
achat cialis
acheter cialis (http://prixcialisgenerique.net/) cialis achat
precio cailis (http://comprar-cialis-sinreceta.net/) cialis sin receta
cialis (http://acquistare-cialis-italia.net/) cialis
achat cialis
vente cialis (http://prixcialisgenerique.net/) acheter cialis
precio cailis (http://comprar-cialis-sinreceta.net/) cialis generico
acquistare cialis (http://acquistare-cialis-italia.net/) prezzo cialis
achat cialis
cialis achat (http://prixcialisgenerique.net/) vente cialis
venta cialis (http://comprar-cialis-sinreceta.net/) comprar cialis
cialis acquisto (http://acquistare-cialis-italia.net/) acquistare cialis
acheter cialis generique1
cialis acheter (http://commandercialisgenerique.net/) cialis moins cher
acquistare cialis (http://acquistarecialisitalia.net/) cialis costo
precio cialis (http://comprar-cialis-generico.net/) comprar cialis online
acheter cialis generique1
prix cialis (http://commandercialisgenerique.net/) cialis
costo cialis (http://acquistarecialisitalia.net/) cialis roma
cialis precio (http://comprar-cialis-generico.net/) cialis 20 mg
acheter cialis generique1
prix cialis (http://commandercialisgenerique.net/) cialis generique
acquistare cialis (http://acquistarecialisitalia.net/) cialis compresse
comprar cialis (http://comprar-cialis-generico.net/) cialis 10 mg