HBP Chapter Fourteen: "Felix Felicis"
Apr. 6th, 2013 01:56 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
for-diddled.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslock* First up, I’m not sure what the name “felix felicis” is about. It’s Latin for “happy of happy”, but that makes no sense whatsoever. If I were in a particularly cynical mood, I might suggest she looked up happy in a Latin dictionary, found felix felicis, and didn’t realise that the second word was just the genitive singular of the first.
* Ron correctly points out that Harry’s lessons with Dumbledore aren’t actually teaching him anything useful, although once again we’re probably expected to judge him for his lack of blind faith in whatever his superiors say ought to be done.
* Hermione’s defence, that the lessons help to find out Voldemort’s weaknesses, might be more convincing if Harry ever actually uses something from Voldemort’s childhood against him.
* I’m not sure why Harry’s so averse to attending Slug Club meetings. Yeah, Slughorn’s a bit obsequious, but not so bad as to justify Potter’s constant attempts to avoid him.
* This scene perfectly captures Ron and Hermione’s dynamic: Ron sneers at Hermione for being better than him, and Hermione puts Ron down and makes him feel jealous. If this is JKR’s idea of romance, I’d hate to be her husband.
* Still, at least Harry’s got his priorities right: how will he be affected if they start going out?
* “Under the influence of Butterbeer” makes it sound like an alcoholic drink, but I’m pretty sure we’ve seen no-one (or at least no-one human) get drunk off it before, and there’s never been any indication of an age limit for drinking it. Oh dear, continuity.
* Seamus slams his books and looks sour when Dean gets a place on the team instead of him. For all that fandom has Slytherins down as the Hogwarts drama queens, I think that Gryffindors are definitely the most stroppy.
* I can’t imagine where the rest of Gryffindor house gets the idea that Harry plays favourites from. Except perhaps from the fact that he chose his best friend Ron two years in a row, despite the fact that Ron always goes to pieces whenever there’s a game on. Perhaps that has something to do with it.
* Still, it’s a pity JKR had to resurrect nervouskeeper!Ron. Not only was it tedious enough in the last book, its inclusion here just makes the Quidditch scenes in Phoenix seem even more pointless, and Ron even more needlessly pathetic.
* Ginny, of course, looks even better than usual in this scene: not only does she score most of the goals against Ron (which is probably meant to increase his emasculation – even his little sister is better than him), but she also makes Harry laugh with her sassy put-downs. When she and Harry get married they can both bond over their mutual enjoyment of other people’s discomfort.
* And… here comes the chest monster! Honestly, Harry and his chest monster must be the second-worst romance I’ve ever read (the first, of course, is Ron and Hermione).
* We know Ginny’s going to be awesome in this scene when she begins by “tossing her long red hair and glaring at Ron”. Somebody kill me now.
* What’s with all this “let’s get this straight once and for all” business? Ginny’s choice of words seems to imply that Ron keeps prying into her love life, but we’ve never been given any indication that this is the case.
* I presume the thing Ron doesn’t want people calling Ginny is “slut”? I wish they would. Not because I think it’s true, but because Ginny’s just so irritating that anything which would annoy her is OK by me.
* Ginny has a go at Ron for not having enough experience. Because obviously, modern society isn’t nearly sexualised enough, we need a series of popular books telling children that anybody who hasn’t had enough sexual experience is pathetic.
* Man, Ginny’s just a total bitch in this scene. Yes, Ron was rude to her, but her response is really disproportionate and uncalled-for.
* It’s odd, but Ginny seems to get most worked up about the way Ron tries to get Fleur’s attention. She sounds rather like a spurned lover here. Hmm, maybe all that Weasleycest fic isn’t quite so out there as I’d assumed.
* No, Harry, don’t stop Ron from cursing her! Let Ginny get zapped for once!
* So Ginny flounces off, leaving Ron behind. I suppose he should count himself lucky she didn’t whip out her wand and perform a super-sassy Bat-Bogey Hex on him.
* “She’s Ron’s sister, Harry told himself firmly. Ron’s sister. She’s out of bounds.” Even though Ron practically threw her at him at the end of the last book. Plot-induced amnesia strikes again.
* Harry feels “dazed and confused” the next morning. So do I, after trying to make sense of this book.
* Hermione’s feeling “hurt and bewildered” by Ron’s “icy, sneering indifference”. If this was a semi-believable book, I’d say that Ron had finally had enough of Hermione’s constant passive aggressiveness and undermining, but as it is I think we’re supposed to assume he’s just upset at finding out Hermione had snogged Krum two years ago.
* Incidentally, why is this supposed to be such a big and shocking revelation? Surely when two teenagers go out, the natural assumption is that they’ll end up snogging?
* Luckily for Ron, he’s got no need to worry: Hermione’s just getting her necessary practice in to hone her technique for her true man.
* FOR GOD’S SAKE ROWLING SHUT UP ABOUT THAT SODDING BAT-BOGEY HEX GINNY IS COOL AND SASSY WE GET IT ALREADY STOP RAMMING IT DOWN OUR THROATS AAARGH… *takes deep breaths*
* Lavender’s trying to make Ron feel better. Keep away from him, you hussy! Ron doesn’t need a nice, friendly girlfriend, he needs a scornful and contemptuous one to keep him down in his rightful place.
* Well, at least the Slytherins are sensible enough to have substitute players.
* Harry gets his hand crushed by the Slytherin captain, and I seem to recall Flint used to do the same thing to Oliver Wood. Is hand-crushing a typical Slytherin trait then? Maybe all their parents told them about the importance of a good firm handshake, and they just take it a bit too far.
* Harry dislikes Zacharias heartily… presumably because he can just sense the latent evil in the boy, even though he hasn’t done anything yet which would merit such dislike. If anything, surely Harry ought to feel friendly towards a fellow DA member?
* Ginny scores four of Gryffindor’s six goals. Colour me shocked.
* The game goes pretty much unremarkably: Gryffindor score a few goals, and then Harry’s broom wins the game, rendering everything which came before totally pointless.
* “Oi, Harper! How much did Malfoy pay you to make you come on instead of him?” I’d say that distracting an opposing seeker like this was a very Slytherin thing to do, were it not for the fact that we hardly ever see Slytherins actually doing cunning and sneaky things like this.
* Not that playing on superior brooms and deliberately psyching out opponents makes the Gryffindors any less chivalrous, you understand.
* Ginny flies into Zach for his insufficiently fawning commentary, placing the crowning turd on the mountain of raw sewage that is this Quidditch game.
* “I never said you couldn’t [save goals]!” No, Hermione, you just implied it really, really strongly, such that nobody could miss that that was what you were thinking.
* Ron “looks like he’s eating [Lavender’s face],” unlike Ginny, who daintily glues herself to her boyfriend’s mouth.
* Unfortunately Ginny’s probably right: most first romances in these books seem to be for people to “refine their technique” before moving on to their true love.
* Hermione seems rather surprised that Ron got tired of her hectoring and decided to hook up with somebody who actually respects him instead. Maybe she’s been getting all her dating advice from The Game or whatever the wizarding equivalent is.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 01:54 am (UTC)I appreciate that, and ditto. As long as both of us stays civilised and mature and don't stoop to name-calling and such I can't see that we can 'fight'.
These sort of things only devolve into ugly 'fights' when ad hominem personal attacks are launched by people who can't otherwise refute their opponents' arguments (but also can't say "you're right, I'm wrong"). condwiramurs calling me a 'misogynist' and oneandthetruth saying that I have a 'madonna/whore complex' (!!!) are attempts to 'fight'. They can't play the game so they attack the player.
We'll behave better than that.
... calling had 'the girl who dates', and the other elements I mentioned above, are labelling the whole problem with her dating behaviour.
No. I'm labelling Ginny as The Girl Who Dates because that's what she is. At small moments in time she plays quidditch. Over an almost continuous period of three (two and a half?) school years she is dating. She expresses a need to be dating. And she dates because she defines herself as someone who dates. "Be yourself" she is advised. I am a girl who must date. I went to the ball with Neville and picked up Michael. I've dumped Michael, it therefore follows that I must date someone else, I'm picking Dean. I've dumped Dean, I'm throwing myself at Harry, he's kissing me, he's looking to MY BROTHER for permission, well that's okay, I need a boyfriend and I've landed my crush!hero!
But 'the whole problem'? No. There are many many reasons to dislike Ginny Weasley. Please don't fixate on one label I've given her and condemn me for condemning her *entirely* on that.
When I was in school, there were quite a few girls who did, indeed, believe that they had to have a boyfriend at all times to be attractive and not a loser. ... I thought that attitude was pathetic and still do.
And so do I. I see Ginny as one of those people - somewhat - Ginny wasn't dating to 'not be a loser', she was dating because that's how who thought 'the real Ginny' was, a girl who dates, and she was also using her boyfriends to attract the boy she *really* liked - and I think she's the lesser for it.
And we seem to be agreed on this point. The attitude that girls - boys - people feel in that they HAVE to have a dating partner is 'pathetic', to quote yourself. So why am I the sexist?
Labelling her as 'the girl who dates' is objectionable.
I'm more concerned about the label being *accurate* than it being found to be 'objectionable'.
Am I not allowed to label Ginny as the Girl Who Dates because there are real people like her in the real world? Is that all this boils down to?
Look, if we were discussing real people then there'd be perhaps a reason to say that the label is 'objectionable'. Basically because the *entire topic* would be objectionable. How dare people look at Brad's dating record, that's his business and no-one else's!
But this is Ginny Weasley, a fictional character. Who we are analysing as part of a literary critique.
It's TWO DIFFERENT THINGS entirely. Real world versus fiction. That's part of why I said that condwiramurs was confused, because she did some simplistic word association between my analysis of Ginny and what she sees in the real world and couldn't tell the difference. OMG Brad must call people like Ginny the same thing in real life or no well other people do if not Brad so it's all the same thing anyway and I don't like it so Brad mustn't do it for a fictional character.
We're talking about the Girl Who Dates of the Harry Potter world. No similarities between any real-world identities, live or dead, is intended by the makers of these comments. :-)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 03:14 am (UTC)No. You're promoting a value system with which I disagree. She's a normal, if unlikeable character and she can date as much as she jolly well likes without it becoming her whole character or making herself less 'worthy', let alone of some boy.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 03:59 am (UTC)Yes, because I believe the label fits.
You have completely ignored everything I said ...
No, Malic, I didn't ignore you. I just disagreed with you, and explained my reasoning, why I disagree. It's not ignoring you. It's listening to you, and then disagreeing with you.
You are putting words into the character's mouth by saying she defines herself as 'someone who dates' -
No I haven't. Hermione advised Ginny to 'be herself' -
"I never really gave up on you," she said. "Not really. I always hoped ... Hermione told me to get on with life, maybe go out with some other people, relax a bit around you, because I never used to be able to talk if you were in the room, remember? And she thought you might take a bit more notice if I was a bit more - myself."
It's there in black and white, Malic - maybe go out with some other people. So, wow, Ginny took that advice to heart! She became the Girl Who Dates.
I didn't put words into Ginny's mouth. I simply read what came OUT of that mouth! :-)
It really is that simple, Malic. Now, you may hate the idea that Rowling wrote a girl who was advised to date, who then took the advice and defined herself as a girl who dates. If so, take it up with the author. Or Ginny. :-) Not blame me. I'm just reading what is in the books.
(I'd forgotten entirely Ginny's own self-admission that she was deliberately being the Girl Who Dates. Wow. Maybe I had that quote in mind way back (years ago) when I started using the term, and then forgotten it. Up to just now I was working more from what we're shown of Ginny, what else she says. Anyway, I'm glad I went and had another look, right now, for this comment. Ginny's definition of Ginny is the icing on the cake.)
You're promoting a value system with which I disagree.
I'm pointing out Ginny Weasley's behaviour; as shown by Ginny's actions and as defined by Ginny Weasley herself. "Go out with some other people". Goodness, it couldn't be more clear! 'Objectionable' or not, 'disagreeable' or not, Ginny was - deliberately, and as she admits - the Girl Who Dates.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 04:54 am (UTC)"You are putting words into the character's mouth." You are, you know. There's a hell of a leap between 'Hermoine told me to get on with life, maybe go out with some other people, relax a bit around you ... you might take a bit more notice if I was a bit more - myself' and 'Dating is all I am interested in, it's the only important thing about me.' There is no reasonable way you can see this as her defining herself solely by her dating. (She does, for example, get much more aggressive after the early years, so that's one element that might be more 'her' that she was keeping in check before. She states her opinions. She's committed to the DA and Quidditch and she's not quiet about it.)
She dates. There's nothing wrong with that. You apparantly think there is, and that's the value system I diagree with.
I don't see any evidence that she defines herself by that. It's pretty clear that you define her by it, though, to the extent of inventing a label and using it over and over and over again. That's not Rowling's fault (for a change). It's yours.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 06:45 am (UTC)I've covered that before. We can assume that Ginny has otherwise a 'normal' life - she breathes oxygen, she eats food, she goes to the toilet. But when we're asked "what distinguishes Ginny Weasley from normal?" - when she tells us what she did to attract Harry - we're shown and told that she dated. And that's about it.
- and there being nothing wrong or really that unusual about her dating behaviour.
I've covered that too. A girl who feels pressed to date, who defines herself by dating, who needs to be continually dating ... that is unusual and wrong. Girls can do so much more than just date! They shouldn't have to centre their life around dating! It's sad to think that Ginny didn't try to do much else.
I quote yourself:
When I was in school, there were quite a few girls who did, indeed, believe that they had to have a boyfriend at all times to be attractive and not a loser. ... I thought that attitude was pathetic and still do.
At Hogwarts there was a girl who did, indeed, believe that she had to have a boyfriend at all times to be attractive to her crush ... I think that attitude is pathetic and still do.
"You are putting words into the character's mouth." You are, you know.
No, I'm not. And your telling me I am I am I AM!! adds nothing to the conversation.
There's a hell of a leap between 'Hermoine told me to get on with life, maybe go out with some other people, relax a bit around you ... you might take a bit more notice if I was a bit more - myself' and 'Dating is all I am interested in, it's the only important thing about me.'
No, it's not a hell of a leap.
When Ginny explains what she did to attract Harry the only specific thing she tells us is she dated other boys. Shucks, she doesn't even say "I played Quidditch for you". Hopefully because she played it for herself, her own enjoyment. But you can't say that about the dating. Ginny Weasley deliberately became a Girl Who Dates as part of her trying to snare Harry.
She's committed to the DA and Quidditch and she's not quiet about it.
Yes, she is; in that segment where she's telling Harry what she did to snare him. Nothing about the DA and Quidditch. Clearly she felt her dating efforts were more significant. I never gave up on you! I dated! Even when you were in the room!
She dates. There's nothing wrong with that. You apparantly think there is -
In the context of Ginny Weasley's dating, yes.
I don't see any evidence that she defines herself by that.
Well, as you said before, I guess we're done then. Because it's crystal clear from the text itself. You just don't want to see it, so you keep shying away at angles and then picking up crosstalk from the real world.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 06:58 am (UTC)Because it's crystal clear from the text itself.
No, it isn't. At all. I have nothing to add to what malic_ba and annoni_no have said; they've set the issues out very well. But just so you know: I, too, do not see in that quote the stuff you say is "crystal clear."
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 07:53 am (UTC)It's not a job interview, anyway. She's not responding to 'what's special about you, why should I go out with you?' Let alone 'what are you interested in, what's important to you?' (As if Harry would ever ask a question like that!)
'I thought that attitude is pathetic and still do' - yes, and I don't think it's any less pathetic because it apparantly worked and scored the target boy. Still, those kids' dating didn't define those girls, and it doesn't define Ginny.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 05:36 am (UTC)"I never really gave up on you," she said. "Not really. I always hoped ... Hermione told me to get on with life, maybe go out with some other people, relax a bit around you, because I never used to be able to talk if you were in the room, remember? And she thought you might take a bit more notice if I was a bit more - myself."
Let's break this down.
Hermione said to:
1) get on with life (don't obsess over Harry all the time)
2) try dating people who aren't Harry (
Ginny might actually like themsorry, this is Rowling-world, all girls need to practice being the perfect girlfriend for their OTL)3) if she really, truly can't get over Harry, then she needs to relax around him and and be herself if she wants him to notice her
This is a list of things Ginny can try; the 'be herself' clause modifies logically only modifies the last item on the list - relaxing enough to be able to interact with Harry in the first place
OR 'be herself' can be read as a fourth, separate piece of advice, meaning it doesn't directly modify any of Hermione's earlier suggestions.
Next point: Ginny herself never said that she actually took Hermione's advice to heart, only that this was the advice that she was given. If anything, she ignored Hermione's advice to be herself in the way she dated. She wasn't being herself by dating boys she didn't actually care for, she was using the experience of dating to develop a skill set, which, by definition, is something you possess, not something you are. This makes her mercenary, and somewhat callous, but not someone who defines herself by the need to be in some sort of dating relationship at all times (ie 'The Girl Who Dates' (her obsessive focus one particular relationship is different problem).
So, no, it's not accurate to say that Ginny defines herself as someone who goes on dates. The dates are the means to an end for her. A tool. Her culpability here begins and ends at the fact that she was using people emotionally, not that she was dating in the first place.
And yes, Madderbrad, harping on a woman's dating patterns alone, without any concerns about the relationships themselves being abusive or otherwise problematic, is a sexist argument in and of itself, as multiple people have explained. Its entire foundation rests on the double standards between women and men. The simple fact is, no one else can know what you truly believe in your heart of hearts, we can only see what you write. So, if you don't want to be mistaken for sexist, then you need to avoid sexist arguments.
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 06:59 am (UTC)Next point: Ginny herself never said that she actually took Hermione's advice to heart, only that this was the advice that she was given.
Ha ha ha!!
Oh, I'm sorry, but that's pretty funny. Why would Ginny lie? Authors don't write clues and twists when the clues and twists are never revealed!
it's not accurate to say that Ginny defines herself as someone who goes on dates. The dates are the means to an end for her. A tool.
That, plus also 'being herself'. It is tacked on to the other statements. Which must surely read as a set of conjunctions. Get on with life AND go out with some other people AND relax a bit around you AND be a bit more myself.
(Where 'relaxing around you' encompassed "date around you" and "a bit more myself" contained "being the Girl Who Dates".)
That's the easiest and most direct interpretation of Ginny's utterance. Trying to twist it out of shape is just desperate. It's not like Ginny said "I got on with life AND learnt to ride a bicycle but didn't AND dated boys AND discovered the thirteenth use of dragon blood but didn't AND dated while you were in the room AND brokered world peace but didn't AND was myself AND was Donald Trump but wasn't". That doesn't make sense. Neither does your trying to twist what Ginny *did* say into that form.
And yes, Madderbrad, harping on a woman's dating patterns alone, without any concerns about the relationships themselves being abusive or otherwise problematic, is a sexist argument in and of itself, as multiple people have explained. Its entire foundation rests on the double standards between women and men. The simple fact is, no one else can know what you truly believe in your heart of hearts, we can only see what you write. So, if you don't want to be mistaken for sexist, then you need to avoid sexist arguments.
Sigh. It's not a sexist argument. It's an observation about a girl who was, presumably, written to be ... what, sexist? Fitting a stereotype? Fitting a slot that is too close to real life double standards for comfort to some here.
I didn't harp on Ginny's dating patterns alone; not deliberately. If she'd done anything else of consequence I would have addressed that as well. But dating was a large part of Ginny's character, her behaviour in her later years at Hogwarts.
It's not I who is sexist. It's my observations of Ginny. Which could be sexist because I'm an evil sexist who paints things in evil sexist tones. Or ... because the subject of my observations is simply behaving in a stereotypical manner which makes one's objective observations appear sexist.
Guess which one it is? Actually, don't guess, look at the text of the books. :-)
no subject
Date: 2013-04-21 10:12 am (UTC)How is this a set of conjunctions? The original quote is a list. It is a list of things Hermione suggested to Ginny. It is prefaced by the words "Hermione told me" and what follows is an indirect quote listing that advice.
Here, from Purdue Online Writing Lab:
Indirect Quotations
Indirect quotations are not exact wordings but rather rephrasings or summaries of another person's words. In this case, it is not necessary to use quotation marks.
Emphasis added.
How the heck do you get from that ("Hermione told me...") to Ginny making a direct statement to Harry about what she actually did? If you want a concession from me, I need a grammatical breakdown of this quote proving it's a direct statement, or else an actual excerpt of the surrounding canon text showing that it should be interpreted as a statement and not an indirect quote as the portion presented clearly reads. The burden of proof is on you. You've been relying on other people to do your grunt work all thread, but that's not going to fly here. 'Cause from where I'm standing, there's only one person here twisting the quotation beyond all reasonable meaning, and it's not me.
I didn't harp on Ginny's dating patterns alone; not deliberately. If she'd done anything else of consequence I would have addressed that as well. But dating was a large part of Ginny's character, her behaviour in her later years at Hogwarts.
Is it a flaw that we don't see Ginny in a wider variety of contexts? Yes. Would we have a better idea of who she is as a person if we saw her in those other contexts? Certainly. But that is not a flaw of the character. It is a flaw in the writing. This critique applies solely to Rowling and her lack of competence in building a believable character and love interest. So, can one make the argument that Rowling is sexist based on her misplaced emphasis? I believe one can.
One can't, however, attribute those flaws in the writing to the character of Ginny. A character's flaws depend on the (in)actions of the characters themselves as presented in the work. The points you keep harping on are that Ginny 1) is dating someone during most of her on-page appearances, and 2) doesn't wait long enough after a break-up before she starts dating someone new. The only way either of these speak badly of Ginny as a theoretical person is if you are operating under the sexist idea that there is a right and a wrong way for a woman to date. The very fact that you refer to her as The Girl Who Dates shows very, very clearly that this is what you most object to. Not Ginny The Emotional User, who uses boys as tools. Not Ginny The Unrepentant Bully, who never shows empathy to anyone not named Harry Potter. Nope. Your ire is for, in your own words, "The Girl Who Dates."
I don't know if you're actually sexist. Quite frankly, I don't care. The fact is you've continued to throw around sexist arguments attacking a female character for behavior (dating frequently and not mourning a failed relationship for too long before beginning another) that in and of itself harms no one and is the business of no one but the person dating. To do this you elide the many more substantive flaws Ginny actually shows in-text. Whether you intend it to be or not, this strain of argumentation reinforces sexist tropes and thus is itself SEXIST. Your insisting that it's not because of magical intentions doesn't change reality.