Argh, this is where the books got extra-frustrating for me. I could accept Harry's cruelty to his friends and capslocking as a reaction to the trauma of seeing Cedric murdered (canonical nightmares! could be PTSD!) and having Voldemort steal his blood to resurrect himself. But this would require the text to acknowledge just how damaged Harry is and how nasty he's really being. None of this "well, he isn't a saint, but he totally has this great capacity for love!" waffling. And then he either has to go on to be an anti-hero who does the job but admittedly isn't that great a guy, or - if Rowling still wanted to go the Harry-is-so-loving route, he'd have to face up to his mistakes and fix things. He could do the fantasy route of having some epiphanies (omg I scarred my friends' hands just like Umbridge did to me!) and trying hard for a few weeks instead of going through all the difficulties real people have to, but he should have had to do something.
Oh, Percy. I liked him since the first book; even if he is a bit pompous sometimes, he seems like one of the few wizards who genuinely wants to make things better. He answers first years' questions and advises kids on their third year elective choices! He wants cauldrons to be safe and non-melty (possibly because he's heard from Ron how many cauldrons Neville has melted)! And he thinks being a thoughtless, possibly criminal sports star is not the same as being a good department manager, especially if there's missing employees involved! He also shows at many points that he cares for his family even when they treat him badly (which maybe isn't so great for him, but compared to the Harry and Dumbledore school of You're-Evil-If-You-Don't-Like-Me, it's refreshing). And, uh, is the only Weasley boy that we know of mature enough to have a girlfriend at 16. (The twins getting dates to a dance isn't the same thing at all.) So, Jo, why is it that you hate the character who values education and responsibility and doesn't think nearly killing people is a good school prank, hm? Why does he get blamed for things when other characters don't, or are even commended for? He trusts the guy in authority. So does Harry. One of them is Wrong... because the author arranged for some convenient secret background to make it so.
This chapter, or one shortly after, would have been a really good time to explain whether the talking portraits are more like ghosts (real-ish people) or more like chatbots. Or better yet, back in PoA when Sirius attacked the Fat Lady's canvas. Did he almost commit murder...ish... or was it more like trying to close the chatbot's window?
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2011-02-14 06:33 am (UTC)Oh, Percy. I liked him since the first book; even if he is a bit pompous sometimes, he seems like one of the few wizards who genuinely wants to make things better. He answers first years' questions and advises kids on their third year elective choices! He wants cauldrons to be safe and non-melty (possibly because he's heard from Ron how many cauldrons Neville has melted)! And he thinks being a thoughtless, possibly criminal sports star is not the same as being a good department manager, especially if there's missing employees involved! He also shows at many points that he cares for his family even when they treat him badly (which maybe isn't so great for him, but compared to the Harry and Dumbledore school of You're-Evil-If-You-Don't-Like-Me, it's refreshing). And, uh, is the only Weasley boy that we know of mature enough to have a girlfriend at 16. (The twins getting dates to a dance isn't the same thing at all.) So, Jo, why is it that you hate the character who values education and responsibility and doesn't think nearly killing people is a good school prank, hm? Why does he get blamed for things when other characters don't, or are even commended for? He trusts the guy in authority. So does Harry. One of them is Wrong... because the author arranged for some convenient secret background to make it so.
This chapter, or one shortly after, would have been a really good time to explain whether the talking portraits are more like ghosts (real-ish people) or more like chatbots. Or better yet, back in PoA when Sirius attacked the Fat Lady's canvas. Did he almost commit murder...ish... or was it more like trying to close the chatbot's window?