Harry Potter and the Death Cult
Dec. 2nd, 2011 01:45 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sweettalkeress.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockSo recently I was reading this (actually really excellent) Pokemon fanfic, which appears to have been an attempt to iron out a rather confusing Pokedex entry. Basically, the fanfic revolves around the idea that a certain species of Pokemon has a custom that all young male members of the community must kill their own mothers as a rite of passage. Anyone who can’t do it is disgraced and treated as vermin for the rest of his life- failure to kill your own mother is considered a sign of despicable cowardice. The more I thought about this fic, the more I realized that there’s a similar parallel in Harry Potter- except that instead of the message being, “If you’re truly a real man and worthy of belonging, you’ll kill your own family on instruction,” it’s “If you’re truly brave, a true Gryffindor, you’ll kill yourself on instruction.”
In Harry Potter we see characters committing ritual suicide on just about any pretext. We see people kill themselves to protect their family (Lily and James), to escape a bad boss (Regulus), as a strategic ploy (Dumbledore), and even to vanquish their enemies (Harry). Granted, it’s quite possible that these people were better off dead than otherwise, given the circumstances; but still, it does seem to be a pattern.
Consider the fate of Lily Potter nee Evans. She dies to protect her son, and in doing so, grants him special love protection. Now, it’s stressed again and again that Lily’s sacrifice was so noble and granted Harry the protection specifically because Voldemort offered her a choice about whether or not to live. And it was noble of her to die for her child- but it also established a pattern that the books’ attitudes towards death reinforce: if you’re in big enough trouble, trouble you can’t escape from any other way, die. Preferably as prettily and dramatically as you can manage.
Then there’s Regulus. There was another essay on here in which someone, I think it was Terri Testing, puts it out there that Regulus’s search for Slytherin’s locket was not to have the locket destroyed, but to, effectively, commit ritual suicide rather than serve Voldemort any longer. And for this the heroes emphatically reward him.
Now consider Peter Pettigrew. Peter Pettigrew is easily one of the most confusing characters Harry Potter ever gave us. He’s pretty much the only Gryffindor who’s never presented in a remotely positive light (at least not once his identity becomes known). The main reason given for this (both by the author and her fans) is that he’s a coward who betrayed Lily and James rather than be killed by Voldemort (granted, we don’t actually know how much of this is true, since the evidence of his cowardice is rather conflicting and since we never get his side of the story- just the main characters’ assumptions). Tellingly, when Sirius confronts him, he specifically goes out of his ways to say that, had Sirius been in his situation, he would have willingly died rather than betray his friends (the fact that Peter easily would have been better off dead than with Voldemort is largely beside the point here, since it’s only DE’s, and never anyone who could be counted among the “good guys” who serve Voldemort out of fear).
And then there’s Phineas Nigellus, who makes the statement about Slytherins choosing to save their own necks. This in and of itself is taken as reason to regard Slytherins as contemptible cravens- they won’t kill themselves for any greater good they can come up with (and you could argue that one of the downsides of “ambition” is that you’re motivated to stay around and wait for things to turn in your favor, rather than the Gryffindorish “bravery” of permanently ending your problems through death).
To return to the fanfic I read earlier, like most pieces of media dealing with death cults from the inside, the fanfic mostly just illustrates how things are done- it doesn’t take a stance on the morality of the characters’ actions, and the narrator is genuinely conflicted about killing someone he loves so much- but not enough to stop himself from doing it. What makes Harry Potter’s death cult so freaky is that it really does seem as though suicide is treated, not merely as a cornerstone of wizarding culture but *objectively good and righteous.* Throughout the series we meet literally no suicide bombers among the villains (despite the fact that the DE’s are terrorists, and terrorists in the modern world are notorious for suicide bombing). No, the only suicide bomber we meet (so to speak) is Harry Potter- who’s supposed to be the hero we’re meant to admire!
So, yeah.
In Harry Potter we see characters committing ritual suicide on just about any pretext. We see people kill themselves to protect their family (Lily and James), to escape a bad boss (Regulus), as a strategic ploy (Dumbledore), and even to vanquish their enemies (Harry). Granted, it’s quite possible that these people were better off dead than otherwise, given the circumstances; but still, it does seem to be a pattern.
Consider the fate of Lily Potter nee Evans. She dies to protect her son, and in doing so, grants him special love protection. Now, it’s stressed again and again that Lily’s sacrifice was so noble and granted Harry the protection specifically because Voldemort offered her a choice about whether or not to live. And it was noble of her to die for her child- but it also established a pattern that the books’ attitudes towards death reinforce: if you’re in big enough trouble, trouble you can’t escape from any other way, die. Preferably as prettily and dramatically as you can manage.
Then there’s Regulus. There was another essay on here in which someone, I think it was Terri Testing, puts it out there that Regulus’s search for Slytherin’s locket was not to have the locket destroyed, but to, effectively, commit ritual suicide rather than serve Voldemort any longer. And for this the heroes emphatically reward him.
Now consider Peter Pettigrew. Peter Pettigrew is easily one of the most confusing characters Harry Potter ever gave us. He’s pretty much the only Gryffindor who’s never presented in a remotely positive light (at least not once his identity becomes known). The main reason given for this (both by the author and her fans) is that he’s a coward who betrayed Lily and James rather than be killed by Voldemort (granted, we don’t actually know how much of this is true, since the evidence of his cowardice is rather conflicting and since we never get his side of the story- just the main characters’ assumptions). Tellingly, when Sirius confronts him, he specifically goes out of his ways to say that, had Sirius been in his situation, he would have willingly died rather than betray his friends (the fact that Peter easily would have been better off dead than with Voldemort is largely beside the point here, since it’s only DE’s, and never anyone who could be counted among the “good guys” who serve Voldemort out of fear).
And then there’s Phineas Nigellus, who makes the statement about Slytherins choosing to save their own necks. This in and of itself is taken as reason to regard Slytherins as contemptible cravens- they won’t kill themselves for any greater good they can come up with (and you could argue that one of the downsides of “ambition” is that you’re motivated to stay around and wait for things to turn in your favor, rather than the Gryffindorish “bravery” of permanently ending your problems through death).
To return to the fanfic I read earlier, like most pieces of media dealing with death cults from the inside, the fanfic mostly just illustrates how things are done- it doesn’t take a stance on the morality of the characters’ actions, and the narrator is genuinely conflicted about killing someone he loves so much- but not enough to stop himself from doing it. What makes Harry Potter’s death cult so freaky is that it really does seem as though suicide is treated, not merely as a cornerstone of wizarding culture but *objectively good and righteous.* Throughout the series we meet literally no suicide bombers among the villains (despite the fact that the DE’s are terrorists, and terrorists in the modern world are notorious for suicide bombing). No, the only suicide bomber we meet (so to speak) is Harry Potter- who’s supposed to be the hero we’re meant to admire!
So, yeah.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-12-03 04:14 pm (UTC)But I WILL say that it is symptomatic of someone who is at least a hypocrite, whose books present a rather puritanical world when it comes to sexuality, and who has espoused in interviews that it is the philosophy she believes in, but whose actual ACTIONS in her own life shows a completely different picture.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-07 05:38 pm (UTC)Because nobody else, ever, has slept around in their youth and maybe regretted it and then settled down to have a family later on. (Where does this info on JKR come from anyway? One of the British right-wing tabloids?)
This seems a pretty anti-feminist POV to me.
As for the conservative sexual morality in the books, these are, when all is said and done, children's books/young adult fiction. If I want a more adult approach to HP, I'll read the fanfic, thanks. Plenty of hot Snape fics around! :D
But it's worth noting that Ginny calls Ron out for his 'slut-shaming' language towards her in HBP. Believe me, it's rare for me to defend Ginny, because I don't like the character that much, but it is one of those rare occasions when the books take a genuinely feminist POV.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-08 05:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-12-08 09:03 am (UTC)If Ginny actually seemed like she was sexually attracted to Dean/Michael, while still being into Harry; then her character would be a lot more sympathetic, but as it is, she always seems detached, if not actively contemptous of them, so it makes her feminist stance seem really pasted on - A girl can make out with whoever she wants! As long as she doesn't actually enjoy it and it's in the service of eventually landing a husband!
The women in HP who actually seem to be interested in sex as opposed to sex as a means to an ends are still described as pretty awful (Hepzibah Smith for example), it's just that Ron's mistake is thinking Ginny's one of them when her feistiness is more like a disguise to get Harry's notice.
(Even in DH, her most overt mentions of sexuality, the 'birthday present' kiss, is tied to 'In case you meet someone else', rather than Ginny's own sexuality.)
no subject
Date: 2011-12-08 11:11 am (UTC)What I was taking issue with is the claim that JKR is a hypocrite for allegedly sleeping around in her youth (I still want to know the source of this claim) and then writing what seems to be a fairly conservative sexual morality in her stories, i.e. people in the Potterverse tend to find their soulmates at the tender age of sixteen and often get married as soon as they leave school. Now, you can critique that as lame, or ludicrously fairy-tale-ish, or whatever, but I fail to see what the author's alleged wild past has got to do with it (or why we should care). Because I doubt that teenagers reading HP seriously think those books are telling them to get married young.
19 Years Later will Prevent Pregnancy
Date: 2011-12-08 11:54 am (UTC)Sorry I don't have the exact quote but that is pretty much the answer she gave to a question about why the last chapter in DH is 19 years later.
So the author herself does kinda tie in real life with her fictional story and characters. Which personally I find it pretty (can I say stupid) to use that as the reason a chapter that ends my 7 book series happend 19 years later because I didn't want teenagers who read it to go out and mimic the female characters in my story.
Nothing is shown to us in that book that they waited to get married, it doesn't show us anything in they're life during that 19 years. I guess the age of the kids can determine when they were conceived but it still sounds a lot like pandering and...stupid to suggest 19 years later is going to make some teenager reading Death Hallows think - yea, I'll put off having sex with my boyfriend because Hermione and Ginny didn't get pregnant at 18.