J. K. Rowling presents Umbrigde's backstory

[t0ra-chan.livejournal.com]

In time for Halloween JKR gave us another short story (more background info to be honest, it's not like it has a plot). You can read it at Pottermore (if you have an account and can actually remember your user name and password) or you can read it here: J.K. Rowling writes Harry Potter Halloween tale profiling 'malicious' Dolores Umbridge

My personal take on this little story is that it's wholly pointless. It just repeats that Umbridge was always a nasty person with no depth to her and she's worse than blood purists. Nothing really new or insightful is revealed, nor do I believe did anybody care to know this sort of stuff about Umbridge. I also found it very unbelievable that anybody would buy her claims of being a pureblood, considering how small the wizarding community is. And of course she was a Slytherin, because where else could an evil person in HP have come from.

Comments

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

Actually, now that I think about it…Umbridge’s backstory does have certain similarities to Tom Riddle’s.

Both of them are half-bloods, but try to hide their parentage by promoting hatred towards disenfranchised groups. Neither of them marries or has children. Both of them are ambitious and work hard. And both of them are nasty right from the start.

/Does a woman with an empty womb really understand love like a woman entirely defined by her motherly status like Lily or Molly?/

Well, Minerva doesn’t have kids and she’s not a villain, but is that more because she follows the spinster archetype?

/came into contact with a teacher or instructor whom I disliked intensely on sight/

…Like Harry instantly disliked Draco?

/A love of all things saccharine often seems present where there is a lack of real warmth or charity./

Umm…what? Does everyone who loves the Care Bears or Hello Kitty lack “real warmth or charity?” I don’t understand where she gets this assumption from.

childless

[hwyla.livejournal.com]

Despite the fact that MOST of the women we meet in the books are 'apparently' childless, I do think JKR has intentionally linked Dolores and Bella - not by their childlessness, but by their 'childishness'.

Dolores is linked with a woman that JKR thought wore a kid's hairband - despite the fact that a plastic headband made for a 3-yr-old would not have actually fit an adult head (so obviously it must have actually been manufactured with an adult (or at least teen, not pre-teen) market.

And Bella speaks in baby talk. So I can see that JKR seems to feel a real connection between a certain stereotype of woman and evil - as opposed to feeling that the woman might just have an aversion to aging or have been convinced by society that little girls are somehow 'sexy'.

Personally, I doubt Dolores' lack of a husband had anything to do with the men seeing her as 'uncaring' in her youth, but more to do with her unfortunate toad-like appearance (Nightfall Rising has a wonderful bit in her fic 'Valley of the Shadow' about artistEvan wondering whether it was the result of some smile charm gone wrong). I see her mode of dressing as more of one of a woman attempting to look younger as she ages. Sad, but not evil. More desperate than anything else.

As for childless women there seem's quite a list in the books - or at least 'apparently' childless. Minerva tops the list, but she does seem like the spinster teacher stereotype - despite being a widow according to Pottermore. But I wouldn't ever consider her especially 'motherly' to the children of her house.

In this same group of info, Pottermore tells us Sybill is divorced and apparently childless. Note that she dresses strangely as well. Truthfully I'm quite surprised that JKR gave Luna a husband in the future.

Despite a tantalizing hint ages ago that bk7 would show us a 'teacher who had been married', it never materialized in the actual books and IF it was Minerva, it certainly never played a part in the plot. But we have no idea of the marital status of Professors Sprout, Babbling or Vector, not am I sure that 'Madame' denotes marriage for Poppy or Madame Pince (as opposed to just a respectful title for a non-teaching female in a school - something like a wizarding 'Ms.'?)

But note also that no 'hoopla' is created over the childless men in the series. No one ever comments about the lack of children among Albus, Hagrid, Sirius, Flitwick, Aberforth or Severus = nor even how they never married either. Well - we cannot be sure about Flitwick or Aberforth until Pottermore gives us their life histories, but the others certainly never got hitched.

Re: childless

[merrymelody.livejournal.com]

None of the men who are fathers are defined by it in the same way as the mothers, either.

I mean, James and Lily are both idealised, since they died young and didn't do any of the heavy lifting of parenthood (iirc Elkins wrote an essay about how the 'best' mothers in the series are the ones divorced from the 'icky femininity' of 'womens work', and I've gotta say, it still seems to hold up.) but James is fleshed out in far more detail (has circle of friends, secret powers, tools to bequeth Harry, flaws, a journey - albeit off-screen) than Lily, who always seems to end up the object to represent something for a male, whether that be the crux of Snape's journey, or the reason Harry survived.

Or Arthur. Interestingly, Molly and Arthur are probably exceptions in the series in that she's more vibrantly portrayed than him (and for a mother, has far more flaws - I guess because, like Petunia, she did end up doing the 'icky' work of parenting), but almost every mention of her is defined by Oh, Molly, You're Such A Mom in a way that Arthur isn't. Arthur's support to the Order is based around his job and connections to the Ministry (as is the most exciting thing that happens to him - getting bit by the snake. Maybe JKR should have killed him.).
Molly's big moment is defense of her child (against Bellatrix the childless. Can't help but see a little message in that.)

Re: childless

[oneandthetruth.livejournal.com]

as opposed to feeling that the woman might just have an aversion to aging or have been convinced by society that little girls are somehow 'sexy'.

Oh, great. This series isn't warped enough. Now you've got me thinking about the possibility it encourages the sexualization of children, at least girls.