![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
oneandthetruth.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockHarry seems to be suffering from PTSD at the beginning of this chapter: As he looks at Dobby’s body, he flashes back to kneeling beside Dumbledore’s body at the foot of the Astronomy Tower. That seems a little odd, given the differences in manner of death as well as size, color, and species of the corpses, not to mention that Dobby’s body has to be in much better shape than Dumbledore’s was. You’d think Harry would be reminded of Cedric’s body, since he was killed cleanly and left an intact corpse. But of course, Harry didn’t love Cedric the way he did Dobby and Dumbledore, so I guess that’s why he’s not associating them.
Harry calls for Dobby, “even though he knew that the elf had gone where he could not call him back.” Um, actually, you can, Harry; you just aren’t able to yet.
Bill, Fleur, Dean, and Luna gather around him. Harry asks how Hermione is, and Bill tells him Ron has taken her inside, and she’ll be all right. She’s the hero’s close friend, so she has to be all right, but she really shouldn’t. She was slashed up repeatedly by Bella, Crucioed, and had a large, glass light fixture fall on her from a great height. (You know the ceilings in Malfoy Manor have to be at least 12 feet/3.66 meters high, and probably more.) I’m certainly not an expert in emergency medicine, but it seems to me that just the weight of the chandelier should have broken quite a few bones and crushed some internal organs. The large quantity of broken glass also should have made her hemorrhage, given that she was already cut up from Bella’s knife.
Damn! Rowling had a perfect chance to kill off one of the Trio, but she didn’t take it! That sucks!
Somebody else who should be dead is Griphook. He was already in bad shape when they got to the Manor, and he’s smaller than Hermione. Being crushed by the large light fixture should definitely have killed him. Of course, he can’t be dead, either, because he’s needed for infodumping later in this chapter.
I know a lot of people hate Dobby and Hagrid, and I can understand why. They’re both so over-the-top, it’s easy to get too much of them both. But I’ve always liked them in small doses.
However, Harry never seemed to care that much for Dobby, so I don’t get why--again--we’re being treated to Harry’s angsting over the death of a minor character, which goes on for almost five pages. We’re supposed to believe Harry’s suffering is entirely due to his intense grief--”though Dumbledore, of course, would have said that it was love....” Well, yeah, one does tend to feel grief when someone one loves dies. The description of Harry’s feelings as he digs the elf’s grave is actually very authentic; I’ve dug enough graves to recognize and empathize with his emotions. I just don’t believe Harry feels this kind of grief for Dobby.
What does make sense is the guilt Harry feels because Dobby died saving him. Harry’s insistence on doing the hard work of digging the grave by hand and by himself is his way of paying tribute to and paying back the elf in the only way he can. The book admits as much, saying, “...every drop of his sweat and every blister felt like a gift to the elf who had saved their lives.” I don’t know why Harry can’t just admit feeling survivor’s guilt, instead of pretending it’s grief and love. Well, actually I do. None of Rowling’s self-inserts can feel appropriate guilt because that would be to admit they had actually done something wrong (in most cases, though not in this one). Narcissists admit wrongdoing only in extremis, and psychopaths never at all.
What Harry’s inappropriate grief seems like is more of Rowling’s telling rather than showing: “See? See! Harry is so capable of deep love and loyalty! He’s all broken up over the death of somebody he didn’t know well or even like that much. Only a person who’s really deep and compassionate is capable of such suffering.”
It’s been mentioned by others that Harry loves best those who aren’t around him. When people are present, he’s unpleasant or indifferent to them. That must indicate some kind of psychopathology, but I don’t know what kind. Ms. Rowling must be a very hard woman to live with if she is this emotionally confused herself.
As I was rereading this installment prior to posting it, I remembered something a commentator wrote about Beethoven: He got along best with people when they weren’t around him. When I was in college, I did a directed study one summer attempting to prove (I think successfully) that Beethoven had a Borderline Personality Disorder. So I started wondering: Does Harry have one, too?
This sporking is already book length (225 pages and growing), so I’m not going to explore that topic in detail here. I don’t have the canon knowledge necessary to make a thorough case, anyway. However, I did look up the symptoms of BPD (on psychcentral.com), and they certainly sound a lot like Harry. To qualify, he has to have a majority of the symptoms listed below across time and in a variety of contexts. Here they are:
* Frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment
* A pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation
* Identity disturbance, such as a significant and persistent unstable self-image or sense of self
* Impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating)
* Recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior
* Emotional instability due to significant reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)
* Chronic feelings of emptiness
* Inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)
* Transient, stress-related paranoid thoughts or severe dissociative symptoms
Yeah, that sounds very Harryish. Sweettalkeress’s HP abridged series is doing a great job of illustrating certain symptoms, such as the identity disturbance (entitled hero vs. tortured martyr), emotional instability, empty feelings, and anger problems. We’ll see the transient dissociation aspect in chapter 34. Harry also comes from the kind of abusive, neglectful background that produces personality disorders of all kinds.
In fairness to Harry, it’s common for teenagers to have fluid identities and behave erratically. That’s not even to consider the tremendous pressure he’s under, with his whole society screaming, “KILL VOLDEMORT! SAVE US ALL! ONLY YOU CAN SAVE US!” That’s far too much pressure to put on anyone, let alone a messed-up kid from an abusive and neglectful background.
Back to the story:
Something good came out of the Mash Up at Malfoy Manor: Harry recommits himself to the Horcrux hunt and is no longer entranced by the Hallows. “...[H]e no longer burned with that weird, obsessive longing. Loss and fear had snuffed it out: He felt as though he had been slapped awake again.” I’m glad somebody slapped you awake, Harry. I’ve been wanting to do that for ages.
After the grave is dug, everybody except Griphook and Ollivander (who are apparently too badly injured) comes out for the burial. Luna again proves herself the most spiritual character in the series as she says some lovely words of thanks and tribute, then Bill uses magic to fill the grave with dirt. I thought Harry would want to do that, too, but apparently not. Or rather, apparently Rowling has finished with the character development and Voldie-vision Harry experienced while he dug, so she can now get on with the plot. However, Harry does tarry long enough to find a rock and use his wand to carve a grave marker.
Now that Rowling has established (to her own satisfaction, at least) that Harry is a fount of love and compassion, he can return to normal, i.e., being a selfish jerk. He demands to see Griphook and Ollivander, and tough luck if they’re not up to his questioning right now. Of course, this is presented as being manly, take-charge behavior on Harry’s part, but it’s really overbearing selfishness and impatience. It’s not as if he’ll be acting on their information until Hermione is ready to leave, and that won’t be for a few days at least. (In fact, it’s not until early May, as we find out in chapter 26. That’s at least five weeks away, and probably longer. The lengthy recuperation required by Hermione and Griphook, even with the assistance of magic, are further evidence they should be dead.)
While the commandant is waiting for the prisoners to be prepared for interrogation, I mean, the hero is waiting for his fellow guests to get ready for his gentle information-gathering, Harry muses again over who sent Dobby and is convinced it was Dumbledead. He doesn’t know how that worked, except that his idol once told him, “Help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Tell that to Severus Snape! Tell that to all the victims of the James gang! Tell that to Moaning Myrtle and Rubeus Hagrid! Tell that to all the anonymous victims of bullies and administration favorites over the decades, no, centuries, because you just know Albus Dumbledore, as much as he sucked, can’t have been the only Hogwarts head who let his pets do whatever the hell they wanted without punishment. That sentence should read, “Help will always be given at Hogwarts to those who ask for it, IF the school officials feel like giving it, and they aren’t overruled by their superiors.”
For some bizarre reason, Bill removes Griphook from the guest bedroom and lays him on his and Fleur’s own bed for the questioning. Way to screw up your marriage in the first year, there, Bill. I sure wouldn’t approve of that, and Fleur seems more fastidious than I am. Harry apologizes to Griphook for disturbing him and asks about his health; this proves Harry learned something from Dumbledore, i.e., insincere concern for others.
Griphook remarks on how unusual it was for Harry to dig a grave for an elf and rescue a goblin. He acts as if Harry were, maybe not the Jesus of this story, but certainly the Gandhi. Maybe my standards are too high, but I see what Harry did as the minimum he owed to decency. It’s a mark of how warped are the morals of both this book and the Potterverse in general that Harry’s minimally honorable behavior is treated as a sign of his extraordinary compassion and goodness. It’s also a mark of just how screwed up are wizard-every-other-species-on-the-planet relations that everybody seems to agree with this view.
Harry tells Griphook he wants to break into the Lestranges’s vault at Gringotts, and Griphook says he’ll think about helping him.
Hermione does something she should have done years ago when she calls herself a mudblood and says she’s proud of it. I’ve thought since I first read these books that someone should have started a mudblood pride movement at Hogwarts. They could have T-shirts and sweatshirts that say, “Mudblood Pride,” “My Muddy Blood Is Richer than Your Pure Blood,” and “Say It Out Loud! Mudblood and Proud!” You can’t insult somebody if they refuse to be insulted.
For once Harry is allowed to figure out something before Hermione when he tells her and Ron he thinks there’s a Horcrux in Bella’s vault, and that’s why he wants in it.
After finishing with Griphoook, Harry continues his questioning with Ollivander. Keep this fact in mind as you read about Harry’s conversation with the wand maker: Ever since his holly wand broke, Harry has blamed his inability to perform magic effectively on the replacement wands he’s been using, first Hermione’s, then the captured wand Ron gave him.
First Harry asks if his wand can be fixed and is told ‘no.’ Ollivander tells Harry, “...[I]f you are any wizard at all, you will be able to channel your magic through almost any instrument.” Take that, Harry! This is Rowling admitting Harry sucks as a wizard!
Harry also asks why his holly wand broke Voldy’s borrowed wand during their dogfight. It seems Voldy had been told by Ollivander that his and Harry’s wands had twin cores, so Voldy used a different wand because he didn’t want a repeat of the GoF graveyard battle, when the wands nullified each other. Ollivander says, “I had...never heard of such a thing. Your wand performed something unique that night. The connection of the twin cores is incredibly rare, yet why your wand should have snapped the borrowed wand, I do not know....” (Ellipses in original)
*frantically waves hand in the air like Hermione* I know! I know! Call on me, teacher! PLEASE!
Harry’s wand has to think for and protect him because he’s too stupid and incompetent to think for and protect himself! Ollivander’s the expert, and he just admitted it. He said any halfway decent wizard can perform magic with almost any wand. The reason Harry could only work with the holly wand is because of the phoenix feather core it shares with Voldemort’s wand. That is, it wasn’t Harry doing the magic with Harry’s wand! It was the Voldemort soul piece!
Once Harry was forced to use wands that didn’t have that core, the soul piece couldn’t do the work for Harry any more. He was forced to rely on his own magical powers and competence, which are clearly minimal. This is proven by his inability to do effective magic with any other wand.
It’s also proven by an incident from PS/SS. Remember when Harry was being chased by bullies and inexplicably found himself on top of the shed roof? That was the soul piece allowing him to fly like Voldy. Lily could slow her descent from a height, as if she had an invisible parachute, but that is not the same as flying, and we have no evidence she could fly. Only Voldemort and Snape fly without assistance!
The evidence is overwhelming that I am right. How many spells can Harry do effectively? Expelliarmus, Expecto Patronum, Protego--that’s it. Even as a young adult, he is incapable of doing the basic healing or cleaning spells a young child should have down pat before going to Hogwarts. Of course, we’re told the Patronus spell is difficult and advanced, but who told us that? Remus Lupin, friend of Harry’s father, sycophant, and notorious liar, particularly when it comes to flattering Harry. Recall Lupin also said Snape didn’t like James because Snape was envious of Potter Sr.’s Quidditch prowess, and we know that was a lie. Given this evidence, anything Lupin says that cannot be confirmed by an independent source, especially regarding the Potters, should be dismissed out of hand.
True, Hermione has trouble with the Patronus spell, and she’s super-competent. Doesn’t that prove it’s a very difficult spell? Not at all. To take an example from a different field, Ludwig van Beethoven was a virtuoso organist, the greatest pianist of his day, one of the greatest pianists in history, and probably the greatest improvisational musician ever. But he was only a decent violinist. Everybody has areas of weakness, no matter how good they are overall.
In addition, Hermione is very gullible where authority figures are concerned. If a teacher tells her, “The Patronus is a very difficult, advanced spell that many people can’t ever master,” she’ll believe that, which may create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
A couple of years ago, another DTCL member and I facetiously suggested Harry was less intelligent than his wand. We didn’t know we were right. It rarely happens, but this is an occasion when I would have preferred to be wrong.
Ollivander also confirms the existence of the Elder Wand, but says he doesn’t know if it has to be captured by murder, or if it can be won by other means. Harry then asks about the Deathly Hallows, but the wand maker has never heard of them. At least, that’s what he claims. Since the Deathstick is part of the set of Hallows, I find it unbelievable that any wand expert has never heard of the rest of the set.
The main point of this conversation is to introduce that “wand mastery” BS that so warped the story and infuriated the independent-minded parts of the fandom. It is completely unnecessary: Harry had defeated Voldemort before with his regular wand--and the graveyard battle at the end of Goblet of Fire is far more interesting and exciting than the contrived silliness of their final showdown at the end of Deathly Booby Prizes.
It is essential to remember that Rowling didn’t work this “wand mastery” garbage into the story until the final book--and two-thirds of the way through the final book, at that. If it had been important, it would have been brought up and built up far sooner, e.g., the way Harry’s painful scar was. The real reason for the “wand mastery” nonsense is to give Rowling an excuse to kill Snape. It serves no other purpose!
After finishing with Ollivander, Harry goes outside with Ron and Hermione. He tells them the conclusions about the Elder Wand he’s gleaned from his Voldie-visions and Ollivander’s information. He’s realized that Gridelwald was the hot blonde who stole the EW from Gregorovitch, and that when Dumbledore defeated his ex, he became the wand’s owner.
Just then, Harry has another convenient Voldie-vision. He sees Voldy arrive at Hogwarts and wait at the gates for Snape to let him in. I don’t understand this. Since the Dull Lord has taken over the school, shouldn’t he be able to get in by himself? Since he can fly, why doesn’t he just fly over the walls? That’s what he does later during the final battle. More arbitrary nonsense.
Anyway, the DL sends Snape back to the school, promising to meet him later. Then he goes to Dumbledore’s tomb and breaks it open. Carrying on magical society’s liking for traditions that have been abandoned by non-magical society, the body is wrapped in a shroud. “The face was translucent, pale, sunken, yet almost perfectly preserved.”
Hmmm. I wonder if his body smelled like flowers? In an episode of The X-Files, a man died, but several days after his death, his body had not begun to decompose and smelled like flowers. Scully, who was raised Catholic, says in Catholic doctrine there are people called “incorruptibles,” saints whose bodies do not decompose, and that smell faintly like flowers. I’m really sorry Rowling did not include that nauseating little detail to make her Dumbledore worship just that bit more offensive. On the other hand, if mary_j_59 is right, and Snape is a saint, that bodes well for anybody who wants to resurrect him.
After thinking contemptuously about Dumbledore, Voldy takes the EW from the corpse’s fingers. The last sentence of this chapter is actually very good: “The spiderlike hand swooped and pulled the wand from Dumbledore’s grasp, and as he took it, a shower of sparks flew from its tip, sparkling over the corpse of its last owner, ready to serve a new master at last.”
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 12:51 am (UTC)Yes, I’m pretty much of the same opinion. I know that there are valid issues to be raised about Hagrid and Dobby’s characterizations, but despite that, I’ve never found them insufferable in the same way that some fans have (except when Dobby kept trying to “save” Harry in CoS). If Hagrid had died as well as Dobby, I would’ve been sad.
/That’s not even to consider the tremendous pressure he’s under, with his whole society screaming, “KILL VOLDEMORT! SAVE US ALL! ONLY YOU CAN SAVE US!”/
I know that Harry follows the Chosen One trope that many fantasy heroes do and that’s why he has to be the one to kill the villain. But the fact that so many of the adults in his world buy into the trope and all follow the lead of his mentor’s insistence that Harry go it alone breaks the suspension of disbelief. At least Frodo had the Fellowship and entire armies trying to hold off Sauron’s forces and Luke Skywalker had the entire Rebellion working to defeat the Empire without him.
/Tell that to Severus Snape! Tell that to all the victims of the James gang! Tell that to Moaning Myrtle and Rubeus Hagrid!/
Or any Slytherin, really. What kind of help did Draco get? Dumbledore didn’t offer him assistance until after Draco had nearly killed two students. But then, maybe it all depends on the person actually asking for help.
/It’s also a mark of just how screwed up are wizard-every-other-species-on-the-planet relations that everybody seems to agree with this view./
Yes, I thought that this is what the remark partly implied that wizard-house elves relations were so low that a wizard exhibiting basic decency for an elf was unheard of. Which goes to show that house elves aren’t considered like family because why then would wizards burying house elves be so uncommon? I mean, even pet owners bury their cats or dogs when they die. Yet wizards apparently can’t even do that for house elves.
/Recall Lupin also said Snape didn’t like James because Snape was envious of Potter Sr.’s Quidditch prowess, and we know that was a lie./
Like with Dumbledore’s lies about Snape and James, did JKR not read back and realize that her new revelations about James made Remus a liar? She changed the entire reason for James and Snape’s enmity, did she even notice?
/It is essential to remember that Rowling didn’t work this “wand mastery” garbage into the story until the final book--and two-thirds of the way through the final book, at that. If it had been important, it would have been brought up and built up far sooner,/
Do you think that JKR just didn’t know how to end the series and threw in the wand mastery stuff at the last minute? Because it’s true, this new plot development not only comes out of nowhere and was never mentioned earlier in the series, but is undermined by everything that took place in the series so far. That’s why there are so many jokes about Snape/Peter/Tom/etc. gaining mastery of Harry’s wand because of this new wand mastery rule. Not only does it not make sense in itself (wand ownership is transferred just by a wizard grabbing another wizard’s wand?), but it doesn’t make sense with the rest of the series.
/Since the Dull Lord has taken over the school, shouldn’t he be able to get in by himself?/
Especially since he was able to get in while riding in the back of Quirrell’s head.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 03:18 pm (UTC)Like with Dumbledore’s lies about Snape and James, did JKR not read back and realize that her new revelations about James made Remus a liar? She changed the entire reason for James and Snape’s enmity, did she even notice?
----------------------------
In truth, I think JKR did intend Remus to be a liar here. It's hardly his 'style' to tell Harry it was because his father was a bully. Harry might not like Remus then!
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 11:10 pm (UTC)Yes, I thought that this is what the remark partly implied that wizard-house elves relations were so low that a wizard exhibiting basic decency for an elf was unheard of. Which goes to show that house elves aren’t considered like family because why then would wizards burying house elves be so uncommon? I mean, even pet owners bury their cats or dogs when they die. Yet wizards apparently can’t even do that for house elves.
This raises some very interesting questions about the Black family's relationship with their house elves.
I'm pretty sure it was Jodel who worked out that Black family first started mounting the heads of their deceased elves on the wall sometime during the Victorian Era. It is important to remember that, no matter how morbid it may seem in the 21st century, values and mores change. During Victorian times, taking a deceased pet to a good taxidermist was normal, and sign of how much you loved that pet - a way of keeping them nearby in some form. The modern equivalent would be prominently displaying a picture of the deceased pet, possibly with their collar and tags displayed nearby.
So, (besides the interesting fact that the Blacks were apparently both aware of muggle culture at the time and adopted any part of it) it seems that the family's elves were especially valued, even considered part of the family. This would at least partly explain why Regulus was willing to turn against Tom, and eventually die in an effort to defeat him, after he'd seen what how horribly Kreacher had been treated. It also accounts well for Kreacher's extreme loyalty to Regulus even discounting whatever effects a house elf's bindings might have. (The fact that Kreacher himself views having his head mounted as an honor to be aspired to also adds support.)
Of course, this also opens up a rather interesting, though still nasty, interpretation of Sirius' treatment of Kreacher on his return to 12 GP. Subconsciously or not, Sirius may view Kreacher as not so much a slave/servant under his control, but a full, participating, willing member of the family he hated so much - their oldest, loyalist, most trusted retainer. However, where his parents and brother could retaliate against him, Kreacher is completely under his power. So, despite his apparent hypocrisy after telling the trio that you could get the true measure of a man's character by looking at his treatment of his inferiors, he really might not see Kreacher as inferior to him because no one in his family ever acted as if Kreacher was.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-14 02:25 pm (UTC)I really must say that that I kept expecting her to pull it off, Even tho' I wasn't enamored over bk6's romances, I told myself that it was part of the alchemy symbolism, After all, she pulled off a great apparent switch at the end while still leaving obvious clues (to those of us who looked carefully) regarding Dumbledore's death.
And then she dropped it all. Even in bk6, she started dropping the use of symbolic clues. Albus' was only the first threat of death not preceded by blue flames. It was one of the main reasons I originally believed he was still alive. She changed the rules (unless the Hand of Glory burns blue like a Corpse Flame? Never heard of it doing so, but then Harry couldn't see it. Or I suppose that all the green light in the cave overshadowed any blue?).
And in changing those rules, the books lost a lot of what I (and many others) found so intriguing. Unfortunately, she left us with the long camping trip - which perhaps represented Jesus in the Garden of Gethsename? With Ron leaving/the disciples falling asleep? I don't know what to make of Hermione staying by his side or Ron's return. She changed it all from Alchemy to Religion.
Sorry - muddled post.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-23 02:01 am (UTC)I don't have any literary training and only came across the Alchemy theories in passing, but there was a hard core of H/Hr fans who were convinced that Rowling knew what she was doing and that the rules of Alchemy meant that Hermione and Harry were destined to be a romantic couple.
One of the silver linings of the complete disaster that is DH is that the book shows that Rowling *didn't* know what she was doing ... all across the board. If DH had been a good book with a solid plot then it would have seemed like sour grapes for H/Hr fans to say "oh, but she failed with just the romance". As it is we know that Rowling was pretty much a failure all over. :-) If you know what I mean.
Sometimes I get quite sad about how so much brain power, from so many people, some so much brighter than Rowling, was wasted in trying to foresee how she was going to put her jigsaw together ... when in the end she wasn't able to do so, and didn't even try. Just inventing brand-new pieces - the Hallows - in the final book of the series to cover up the missing bits. Pfah.
I never heard of the 'blue flame' theory before. From what you've said I think you're one of those clever people who were 'betrayed' by Rowling. :-(
I think this post is a bit muddled too. :-)
no subject
Date: 2014-01-31 04:48 am (UTC)But, yea, I felt somewhat betrayed once all the symbolic connections were dropped. At one point in the series, I remember thinking that if she described Sirius' laugh as a bark, just one more time I would give it up as a lack of verbal imagination. Then I discovered theories on the web and got caught up in it all as hints and symbols.
I do think she actually did start out with the intention of using all those hints to mean something. There are just too many instances where this shows. But along the way she dropped it. Perhaps she was peeved that so many folks were figuring things out based on her hints? Or maybe it got too convoluted? Or she just wanted it all 'finished' and gave up in bk7.
I was especially disappointed when the CupboardManSnape that Harry built in bk6 came to absolutely nothing in the last book. Just burnt to a crisp in fiendfyre. I have at least come to terms with that. I wanted it to be the beginning of an understanding. However, it is after all a pretty good symbol of his 'scorched earth' existence with the death of Lily. Doesn't mean I had to like it.
no subject
Date: 2014-02-01 01:23 am (UTC)I'm pretty sure the H/Hr alchemy fans had that handled. :-) I didn't understand it myself.
I do think she actually did start out with the intention of using all those hints to mean something. There are just too many instances where this shows. But along the way she dropped it.
I don't think so. I think the horribly amateurish and terrible writing of book 7 - provably a literary disaster - shows that Rowling never had the brains to do anything clever. The woman grabbed everything she could from popular culture and myth and mashed it all together; there wasn't anything particularly 'clever' there either. Also she showed that almost every book was written as a stand-alone effort; the series failed because she couldn't connect them together, a flaw almost as bad as the huge contradictions that were embedded within DH.
No, I think the zenith of Rowling's cleverness was in cute little puns and linking wizards' names and behaviour with their hidden facets - Sirius's bark, Lupin's surname, etc. I think, from what we know of her limitations - from the colossal flaws of DH and how she completely failed to 'close' the series - she didn't have any real plan from the start.
no subject
Date: 2014-02-01 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-02-01 06:22 am (UTC)Seriously, I don't particularly like to demean people - particularly successful billionaires that 99.99% of the world thinks is a genius (because of the commercial success) :-) - but I think ten years of membership in the HP fandom and seven years of documenting the series's/DH's failures allows me to do it in this case. I really do think the proof is there. An abundance of proof.
... so everything in her world somehow relates to something in folklore or the classics ... Similarly Rowling threw in just enough bits of alchemy ...
I never realised it quite so clearly as I have now in reading your comment, but that's why there were so many theories, so many fans willing to believe that Rowling was going somewhere. Because she stole so much, so many bits and pieces, there were therefore a large number of readers whose own literary knowledge or interests intersected with what was on the HP page. Bits that would ping on their radar.
And they all assumed that Rowling had incorporated those bits with intelligence and planning.
Ultimately I think Rowling was a lazy, simply adequate author. I appreciate that it would have been hard for her - with her "oh, maths!" non-logical mind - to pull all of the threads together in book 7 and make a clever ending. It would have taken her a lot of effort.
She didn't even try.
DH is full of such shocking amateurish errors, problems that even I would have been ashamed to write in high school. From Ron deciding that everyone should abstain from saying the word 'Voldemort' 'just because' through to the flat out contradictions of the desperately-introduced wand lore and Elder Wand malarky. Rowling didn't even try to write a good book.
Add to that the twin sin of her having been hoist by her own petard - all those threads had been placed by her 'free association' in the first place, thrown in without thought of repercussion or meaning - and yeah, I have no sympathy for Rowling. It's a crime that she got away with it.
If you don't mind I'm going to steal your "Rowling was just following a trail of free association" description too; that's a perfect summary.
no subject
Date: 2014-02-01 06:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 10:23 pm (UTC)1) Because teens are still growing and changing, official diagnosis of a personality disorder shouldn't be made before the age of 18.
2) Any consideration of whether a personality disorder is present MUST account for whether or not the behavior exhibited is abnormal FOR THE PATIENT'S CULTURE.
The big issue in my mind is whether any of the characters' behavior deviates markedly from their [i.e. the Wizarding World's] culture, and unfortunately I'd say the answer in most instances is, “Not really.” Still, we can always evaluate how their behavior stacks up relative to European/American norms of conduct.
So, brushing off my copy of the DSM-IV-TR, let's see how Harry stacks up.
First, let's look at Borderline Personality Disorder: A pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
-frantic efforts to avoid real or imagined abandonment. Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.
No. Harry may obsess over whether or not someone is avoiding him (e.g. Dumbledore) but he never actually does anything about it. Moreover, his feelings don't stem from a fear of being alone or concern that the abandonment is due to his being 'bad.' He's also capable of accepting necessary separations, and in fact works hard to justify e.g. Dumbledore seeming avoid him by reassuring himself that Dumbles was just busy.
-a pattern of unstable and intense interpersonal relationships characterized by alternating between extremes of idealization and devaluation
No. Harry doesn't exhibit the wild swings of idealization/devaluation of others characteristic of BPD, nor is he as emotionally invested in them as would be expected. He becomes upset/disappointed/angry if the people around him aren't as supportive of him as he feels he deserves, but his underlying opinion of them doesn't change that much.
-identity disturbance: markedly and persistently unstable self-image or sense of self
No. Harry internalized being The Chosen One soon after being introduced to WW, and never really let go of it. What varied was how he felt about being Special, generally based on whether or not that designation was making his life easier or harder at the time.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 10:24 pm (UTC)-impulsivity in at least two areas that are potentially self-damaging (e.g., spending, sex, substance abuse, reckless driving, binge eating). Note: Do not include suicidal or self-mutilating behavior covered in Criterion 5.
No. Harry barely acts, period. When he does get off his rear, it's usually related to an issue he's been stewing over for some time, or else something he views as a genuine emergency.
-recurrent suicidal behavior, gestures, or threats, or self-mutilating behavior
No. Harry does rush into dangerous situations, but he does so based on an arrogant belief that he's competent enough to handle them, not because he wants/expects to be seriously hurt, nor does he ever deliberately self-harm. His final suicide bombing was based not on a personal desire to die, but a compulsive belief that he had to.
-affective instability due to a marked reactivity of mood (e.g., intense episodic dysphoria, irritability, or anxiety usually lasting a few hours and only rarely more than a few days)
No. Harry's general affect is quite flattened. He rarely responds to events around him with strong emotions, and, fits of temper of aside, he rarely experiences drastic, unprompted mood swings.
-chronic feelings of emptiness
No. While readers may complain that Harry is a void lacking any character or personality, there's no evidence in-universe that Harry perceives himself as empty.
-inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger (e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, recurrent physical fights)
Yes. Oh, heck yes.
-transient, stress-related paranoid ideation or severe dissociative symptoms
Sort of. He does show dissociative symptoms during some periods of stress, and some of his behavior (e.g. his stalking of Draco, constant maligning of Snape's actions and motivations) could be classified as paranoid, but they always struck me more as signs of obsession. YMMV.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 10:25 pm (UTC)-neither desires nor enjoys close relationships, including being part of a family
Check. Harry never reaches out to befriend anyone, nor does he really seem to enjoy the company of the people he's closest to most of the time.
-almost always chooses solitary activities
Check. The only team activity he seeks out and enjoys is Quidditch, but he plays the only position that doesn't require actual teamwork.
-has little, if any, interest in having sexual experiences with another person
No. Harry's relationship with Ginny seems to be almost entirely physical.
-takes pleasure in few, if any, activities
Check. How often has this community complained that Harry never seems to actually do anything with spare time?
-lacks close friends or confidants other than first-degree relatives
Check. Harry doesn't have any first-degree relatives alive, but Hermione and Ron seem to have taken their place.
-appears indifferent to the praise or criticism of others
Check, mostly. Harry doesn't seem to care at all about what most people think of him, unless the dislike/approbation becomes intense enough that it actually affects his day to day life. He does care intensely about what a select few people think of him, though, so it's not a perfect fit.
-shows emotional coldness, detachment, or flattened affectivity
Check. Especially later in the series.
(Underachievement in school is also frequently associated with Schizoid Personality Disorder.)
no subject
Date: 2014-01-13 10:27 pm (UTC)-has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
Check. This tendency gets worse the later in the series you go.
-is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
Check.
-believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
Check. Is embarrassed to be seen in the company of the 'uncool' Neville and Luna.
-requires excessive admiration
Check.
-has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
Check.
-is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
Check.
-lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
Check.
-is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
Check.
-shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Check. Oh, so very much.
My (very much nonprofessional) diagnosis would be comorbid Narcissistic and Schizoid Personality Disorders. Thoughts?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-14 02:06 am (UTC)1) Because teens are still growing and changing, official diagnosis of a personality disorder shouldn't be made before the age of 18.
2) Any consideration of whether a personality disorder is present MUST account for whether or not the behavior exhibited is abnormal FOR THE PATIENT'S CULTURE.
The big issue in my mind is whether any of the characters' behavior deviates markedly from their [i.e. the Wizarding World's] culture, and unfortunately I'd say the answer in most instances is, “Not really.” Still, we can always evaluate how their behavior stacks up relative to European/American norms of conduct.
Yes, I know. That's why I said teenagers tend to have fluid identities and behave erratically. As for the characters' behavior deviating from their cultural norms, given how horribly they behave, that's an awful thought. Maybe I should take the same attitude towards the Potterverse I took when I watched the first season of Game of Thrones: They're all so utterly loathsome there's nobody to root for. I'm just sorry they're too technologically backward to have nuclear bombs. Then they could wipe each other out, and the whole world would be better off.
As for Harry's having a Schizoid PD, that's a much better fit. I knew his behavior sounded like something, but I wasn't sure what. And he has the kind of traumatic background that produces narcissists. Not to mention that having people fawn over him would just feed into that. Marionros, who unfortunately doesn't come around much any more, loves to talk about how narcissistic the Potterverse characters are. BTW, have you read the_bitter_word's outstanding essay on Dumbledore's narcissism? It was posted on Snapedom on 3/22/08.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-15 07:52 am (UTC)The only time we see Harry when he's not under the influence of something (and even that is not sure because he may have went on happily using the cloak) is in the epilog.
We don't know how much mental and emotional imbalance is caused by Voldy's soul part in Harry. Nor do we know what kind of an effect removing the soul part had on Harry. As he lived his whole life with itm having it ripped off might have done damage too.
There are also other horcruxes. From what we have seen the locket did the most damage. Also, while I doubt it was that strong, it's not impossible that diadem (sitting at Hogwarts for years) wasn't able to somehow sense Harry and mess with his head.
And there's the Cloak of Invisibility. Deathly Hallows almost could be another form of horcruxes. If "Death" was a dark lord who wanted to curse the WW forever he could have made Hallows to ensure that dark lords will keep on coming. Make those powerful (and cursed) object that attract a certain kind of wizard, make the hallows capable of sensing and affecting the emotions and will of wizard holding them, infuse the objects with your dark lord-ish essence . . . That would guarantee generations of dark lords.
Even if Hallows are not a form of Horcruxe; in some ways they are very similar.
"You’re in trouble if you get too fond of or dependent on the Horcrux." You can swap Horcrux with Hallow and it will be just as true.
So, as much as I dislike Harry, I sometimes wonder about the reason he went from a okay and even likable kid we have seen in first books to DH!Harry. Without a doubt DD is the one who deserves "credit" for it.
But years of being a Horcruxe (and in the general vicinity of another Horcruxe) and being "too fond of or dependent" on a Hallow could have done a lot to twist him into DH!Harry.
And Ron, Hermione and Ginny(double whammy with the diary) were all close emotionally to Harry the Horcruxe. They also spent a lot of time under the cloak with him.
Basically, I think that combination of those have, at minimum, emotionally crippled those kids. But all of it is being under the influence / suffering magical trauma. That's why I think it's not possible to diagnose them.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-26 04:44 am (UTC)I read that essay on Dumbledore and narcissism a couple years ago, but thank you for pulling it up again. The author makes a lot of great points, as does marionros in her critiques.
What wizards really need is a reality check that actions lead to consequences. As it is, particularly in the old pureblood families, they're so used to being able to fix any smaller problem (broken objects, broken bones, etc...) with a wave of their wand that they don't even seem to register them as genuine problems any more. That attitude right there explains a lot of the wizarding world's tolerance of bullying and physical harm: unless the darkest, most powerful magic is at work, anything purely physical can be restored to its original function with minimal time and effort. Wizards in general don't even seem aware that damage that can't be fixed, like mental and emotional trauma, is something that exists in any meaningful way, let alone as something to be careful of and guard against. (Terri Testing had a good essay on this phenomenon called Two Views of James Potter)
Reintegrating with the non-magical world is the best option for everyone. It's inevitable, but if they do so voluntarily they'll keep the bloodshed to a minimum.
P.S. Could you add some tags to this post, too? I'd hate to lose the discussion here, even if the post itself was duplicated.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-14 02:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-15 08:42 am (UTC)To be fair; other people are impressed with Harry's Patronus. Wizengamot, OWL examiners and DA members. . .
And then we have those DA learn (form HARRY NO LESS!) to cast it without using boggart as props. And everybody in Order is using the charm too.
To be sure JKR have made such a mess of Patronus Charm (seriously, have you read what's in the "Wonderbook: Book of Spells" and that interview JKR gave that "explained" why Umbridge was able to use it? And waht happens to dark wizards trying to cast it?) that anything's possible.
It wouldn't surprise me if it isn't a difficult spell at all. But just something that wizards long ago decide is better not taught to young children. That they are still growing up and shouldn't get "locked" into believing who they are as person based on what form their Patronus take. Or that it's dangerous to let kids play with Patronus and so expose too much of themselves to anybody who might use it. Or that they simply didn't want to deal with the drama that teenagers and patronus would bring ("If you truly loved me your patronus would have changed!", "Your patronus is changing! You don't love me anymore!". "My patronus have changed! What does that mean???" and so on)
And then later generations started believing that the reason it's not taught is because it's difficult.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-15 02:48 pm (UTC)That said - I do believe it was hard for Harry to learn, but then he had not had a happy life. Those happy memories were rather few.
As for the DA - I think it is infinitely easier to cast the patronus without the dementor presence. Lupin really should have started Harry on that first. The drawback for the DA members is that they have no idea that it will be considerably more difficult to cast when confronted by a dementor. A fact that Harry never bothers to tell them, despite having had his own problems casting it that past summer.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-15 03:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-19 10:35 pm (UTC)I've thought about going back through the prior books using the "wand mastery" to figure out who is now the rightful owner of whose wand.
For example after the duel did Snape become the true owner of Lockhart's wand?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-19 10:41 pm (UTC)Did Sirius become the master of Severus' wand after POA?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-19 10:58 pm (UTC)It's such a silly distinction in that practicing for school or the DA apparently doesn't count. But if stealing or snatching the wand from the wizard counts - like in DH for Harry grabbing ANY wand from Draco or Gellert actually stealing the Elder Wand - then Harry lost his wand to BartyJr at the Quidditch World Cup when he stole it out of Harry's back pocket!
no subject
Date: 2014-01-19 11:32 pm (UTC)Oh, yes. So Barty owns Harry's wand - that must have helped getting Harry through the tasks! So was it Barty's lost soul operating Harry's wand in the 7P battle?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 12:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 04:03 am (UTC)You are more than welcome to come over and discuss (or ask) over there. We don't have anywhere the traffic we once did. It has occasionally been questioned by some of our newer members whether any of you might be interested.
At the moment, we've been sighing over the 'see no difference scene', where we are basically told that it happened one way when the canon left it open to interpretation. For the other schools, I only know there was something about Flamel having gone to Beauxbatons and Durmstrang teaching 'martial' magic.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-21 10:46 pm (UTC)We are told that Beauxbatons is in the Pyrenees, has a mainly French intake, with a smaller intake from the Iberian peninsula, and the Low Countries. The Flamels met at Beauxbatons and gifted it with a healing fountain.
Durmstrang's location is hidden and memory charms are used on all visitors. it was founded by a Bulgarian witch. It has had two dubious headmasters in its history (only two?). One was the second Head, Harfang Munter, who established the school's reputation for duelling and martial arts, (not sure why that's dubious) and the other was, of course, Karkaroff. Many parents withdrew children during his period of office. Nothing is said about teaching of the Dark Arts, and whether this was always part of the curriculum, or only took place under Igor; all that is said about Igor's time is that he 'encouraged a culture of fear and intimidation' (thank goodness there was nothing of that at Hogwarts).
It is said in passing that there are twelve wizarding schools - i assume this is world-wide.
The Prophet - we are told that as a 'small, sometimes beleaguered' community, the WW likes parochial news, and doesn't seek political variety in its media (The Prophet is the only large-circulation periodical). That confirms the general view of the WW gleaned from the books. It is also said that whereas Muggles have turned to the internet, wizards seem likely to prefer print for the foreseeable future, and perhaps Muggle papers would do better with moving photos (a joke - I hope).
no subject
Date: 2014-01-21 10:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-22 01:55 pm (UTC)And of course, that Snape was insulting Hermione's appearance, even tho' he never does anything of the sort to anyone else (or even her) anywhere else in the entire series - making him entirely out of character.
Snape does not even do so when he has Peter at his disposal, in his own home. Someone whose appearance offers considerably more opportunities for insults than Hermione's. I can't believe Snape only controls his wish to insult Peter's looks solely because Peter might go whine to Voldy about it. Voldy would blast Peter for being such a crybaby.
Snape is quite sarcastic and insulting at times, but it always seems to be about abilities and/or character.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-22 04:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 02:37 am (UTC)If so, the irony is right up there with Harry’s heatedly assuring Snape in the same scene that he knew Lupin could be trusted because, “Professor Lupin could have killed me about a hundred times this year... I’ve been alone with him loads of times, having defense lessons against the Dementors. If he was helping Black, why didn’t he just finish me off then?”
Yep, Harry, you can absolutely count on the fact that a Death Eater would never refrain from attacking you at the first possible opportunity. Anyone giving you privileged treatment, special lessons, and kindly advice must clearly be the Harry-fan you take him for, rather than a Voldemort-supporter cleverly setting you up for one of the Dark Lord’s schemes….
How’d that trust work out for you the following year with Barty?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 07:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 09:28 am (UTC)Personally I choose to believe that it's only the elder wand that's so finicky. Death himself made it to get the oldest brother and all successive owners, after all, so it would make sense for it to be unique in that way. All other wands seem to choose their master and stay loyal to them, though they may also work for others to varying degrees, maybe depending on how the new user got them, but also and probably more importantly intent, the relationship between the owner and user, personality, magic etc.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 01:13 pm (UTC)But I also wonder about that very strange bit in 7 Potters, where Voldy is using Lucius' wand. That's related to wand ownership and I don't know whether one could say Voldy 'defeated' Lucius for it. He didn't fight him for it. But Lucius' attitude IS defeated. So I'm not positive a wand must even be stolen or won physically/magically. Intimidating someone into giving up their wand seems to also work somehow? So perhaps if Draco did 'let go' he's admitting defeat because he wants Harry to win - hates Voldy?
And does this concept of wand stealing have something to do with the idea that muggleborns somehow 'stole' magic?
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 02:22 pm (UTC)Draco is Master of the Elder Wand. Harry snatches Draco's hawthorn wand, and becomes its master, because and only because of Draco's mastery of the Elder Wand. Only the Elder Wand wants to and/or can transfer mastery when its owner is 'defeated' (by whatever method), and once someone is Master, an overcoming of any wand they hold transfers mastery of that wand and the Elder Wand.
Taking the wand of/overcoming anyone who is not Master of the Elder Wand does not transfer mastery of that wand to the victor, because a normal wand does not change allegiance in that way.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 07:39 pm (UTC)That's what I meant, basically, yes, though I'm not quite decided on the mastery of Draco's wand. The elder wand knows its current master has been defeated and changes allegiance accordingly, and that' probably also part of why hawthorn wand works for Harry, but it's not impossible that another reason is that at that point Draco wants Voldemort finished just as much - sort of how Hermione's borrowed wand works for Harry without abandoning her.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 07:01 pm (UTC)That sounds good, and it makes sense, but that's not what canon says. The very next chapter of my sporking contains this passage: " Hermione’s wand was lost at the Malfoys’, and she doesn’t like Bella’s wand that she’s carrying as part of her disguise. She says it doesn’t work right and feels like a piece of Bella...Harry thinks Hermione’s real problem is that she didn’t take the wand from Bella by force, thus winning its allegiance and bending it to her will."
So it's right there in the text that this rule applies to other wands, also. Now, Harry could be wrong, but since he's the POV character, and he's been right about a lot of other bizarre stuff neither readers nor other characters believed, most likely Rowling is saying he's right about this, too. Unfortunately.
As I said, JKR wants an excuse to kill Snape. Since there wasn't one in the text already, she had to make one up. She didn't care that it was both ridiculous and contradictory of the entire rest of the series. She knew she could write what she wanted at this point and get away with it, so she did. That's how great was her need to get rid of this one particular character. Sick.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 07:35 pm (UTC)Though I agree with you that Rowling somehow expects it to work for other wands as well, in contrast with multiple events in COS, POA, and GOF at the very least that contradict the new info.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 07:55 pm (UTC)I'd forgotten about that, thanks. Maybe that's what JKR wanted us to believe, but I don't think that's necessarily true. Harry is also often wrong, and according to JKR, Hermione often speaks for her. I think it's up to the reader which character he trusts more.
I agree that a big reason for this new piece of wandlore is JKR's need to kill Snape, though I don't see why it was necessary for that - he was a spy and the middle of a battle, there were lots of ways and reasons to kill him without making up something new. I think an even bigger reason is that this way, Harry ends up as the master of the wand Voldemort tries to use against him, which decides the final battle in Harry's favour without Harry having to actually kill Voldemort himself.
no subject
Date: 2014-01-20 09:29 pm (UTC)