Oh, TV Tropes...!

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

Quite honestly, the Harry Potter stuff on that site has gotten to the point where I can't read it because just about everything is fawning over how great and super-special-awesome the series is, oh, and how Snape is an evil douchebag who wanted to get Harry and James killed so he could keep Lily. But this... this makes me want to scream:

"Hermione... [is] one of the smartest and more pro-active females in the whole Harry Potter canon and English literature in general"

WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!

How could they make such a claim?! Hermione is a better heroine than, say, Tiffany Aching?! How about Eliza Doolittle?! And I'm sure you could come up with other examples.

No, no, in Harry Potter it seems fairly obvious that the most powerful women in the series are antagonists. Sure, Hermione's perfectly independent and capable, but in the last several books it's like she becomes Harry's servant because he's too lazy to do anything himself!

God damn it, Harry Potter wouldn't bother me so much if everyone didn't insist it was the greatest thing since sliced bread!

Comments

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

A very good point. I find the insistence on St. Lily rather reflective of the subtle misogyny that puts all women on pedestals, instead of being able to see her as an individual with good points and flaws. The argument that criticizing Lily = misogyny has it exactly backwards.

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

There is something exceedingly odd about a woman writer putting women on a pedestal. I mean, doesn't she know that women aren't perfect angels from the fact that she herself is a woman?

I never really felt like Lily was a person so much as a construct of all that JKR felt was good and loving. Like most Dickens heroines, except with more magic!

[merrymelody.livejournal.com]

I think the thing is, while she may idealise women (in a very set, traditional way, ie. the women most idealised are the ones getting married young, having babies, and having no described jobs outside of child-rearing. Alice Longbottom became an Auror in OotP, but prior to that, Rowling refers to her specifically as a wife. Ie. her natural thought pattern is women as wives. Only upon further consideration of the character does she apparently wonder - did this woman have anything to her besides her son and husband?
Ones like Rita Skeeter who's devoted to her job are described as 'mannish'. Women who deviate from the pattern are criticised with much more passion than deviant men. Even Voldemort.), she doesn't really find them interesting. Like the culture around her, she seems to privilege men driving the action and being the interesting ones while women are generally sidelined.
For example, while Lily is the more positively portrayed one in her marriage, it's James who (supposedly) changes and has growth. It's James who has this circle of friends (female friendship another thing that apparently bores Rowling) who influence the plot, who leaves his invisibility cloak, who's Harry's namesake and Patronus. Even James II is described more vividly than little Lily Luna!
Lily may have been saintlike, but her main character plot is the most ancient one for women: object for men to fight over. (Oh, and of course, mother and wife!)

[for-diddled.livejournal.com]

"and having no described jobs outside of child-rearing"

I don't think that's entirely accurate; Hermione and Ginny Sue both had high-flying jobs.

[merrymelody.livejournal.com]

I dunno, interview canon isn't exactly definitive canon (although I'll be fair to JKR, and say it wasn't like Ron and Harry's careers were explored in the epilogue, the future for all the characters that she wanted to mention in the book itself seems to be limited to procreation.) - if JKR was that dedicated to the idea of female careers, she would have included it in the text itself. (Not that I think it's something she's purposefully ignoring, it's just like female friendship, say - something that doesn't particularly interest her, especially in comparison to men.)

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

I find the insistence on St. Lily rather reflective of the subtle misogyny that puts all women on pedestals, instead of being able to see her as an individual with good points and flaws. The argument that criticizing Lily = misogyny has it exactly backwards.

About 25 years ago, comedian/actor Steve Martin had a TV special. During part of it, he talked about "What I Believe." The only part I remember was him saying, "And I believe a woman should be put on a pedestal--so I can look up her dress." That says it all, right there.

Every time I hear somebody acting like it's honoring women to put them on pedestals, I think of Martin's words. Pedestals are designed for statues and vases, not living beings.