POA: Chapter Three
Jan. 13th, 2007 01:14 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
kaskait.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockThe Knight Bus
*Harry is at large on the streets of Magnolia Crescent and there is anger burning in his heart. But don't worry the love is there too. Its mixing with the anger to create something really good and is sure to save the world.
*Oh no, Harry's stranded in a muggle world. As if the wizarding world is any safer.
*Damn, Harry is now a fugitive and expelled from Hogwarts! He violated the underage magic rule.
*There is a lack of notices from the MOM. I'm thinking this was still during the years that Fudge was still Dumpeydore's water boy.
*Well, now that he is a magical JD, an underage runaway BUT with a vault of gold, why not just use MORE magic? To hell with it all, right Harry? I'm sure the MOM can't pin down you're whereabouts at all. Too bad you aren't as smart as Riddle. I'm sure HE knew all the places he could practice magic without getting expelled. In fact, I'm sure most of Hogwarts (who aren't friends with the trio) know where they can practice magic without being expelled.
*You know, I'm thinking that this restriction is really just to handicap powerful muggle kids.
*Harry feels as if he is being watched. He turns to see a large dog and promptly falls down in surprise.
*The knight bus arrives just in time to prolong the mystery. Damn you Shunpike.
*Shunpike jumps out of the bus to deliver his speech. He is dressed in a purple outfit and his ears are really large and his skin is pimply. I suppose that was why he didn't get a job at the MOM. He was too ugly. We can't have ugly people running around the Ministry. Nope.
*Of course Shunpike has a thick, low class accent. Which is why he is working for a bus company. Don't you just love these books? We always know who is the upper crust from the low because Harry and pals have an RP dialect. Even Ron who should really be speaking with a lower class accent. But then again, his family were most assuredly former Kings of England fallen on low times. Nothing really, really bad can happen to the heroes. The Weaselys may be poor but their blood is the PUREST OF ALL!
*Harry tells Shunpike that he is Neville Longbottom. This is the only time Harry ever thinks of Longbottom away from school. Neville can always be good for an alibi.
*Harry asks Shunpike why muggles can't see the bus. Isn't it great that Harry buys into the prejudice of this world? It is a wonderful example of how loving and giving he really is.
*Shunpike is here only to give information about Black. He is a veritable scholar on Black crimes. He also very generously gives us information on Azkaban.
*Fudge is waiting at the Leaky Cauldron for Harry. Poor Shunpike he fawns all over Fudge. I guess he is still hoping for a better job. Clear up that acne, shrink your ears and learn better pronunciation Shunpike.
*A Harry Potter series bon mot: People who don't speak well deserve the low class jobs they get.
*Another bon mot: If you aren't connected by blood or friendship to someone better, you deserve the low class job you have.
*Fudge laughs off Harry's magical mistake. He states that Aunt Marge has been obliviated and the Dursleys will take him back.
*I shudder to think of what the aurors did to the Dursleys to convince them to take back Harry.
*Harry asks Fudge if he could give him permission to go to Hogsmeade.
*I love how Harry completely forgets all the trouble he has caused and immediately just thinks about his own silly problems. Harry needs to go to Hogsmeade, dammit!
*Fudge refuses to give permission. Damn Fudge, the aurors couldn't get a signed permission note from the Dursleys while they were messing with the Dursleys memories? This is HARRY POTTER you know. He just can't be treated like any old normal person.
*Harry is shown to his room and Hedwig is waiting for him.
*I guess staying with the Weaselys was too much for even Hedwig to handle. She would have rather taken shelter with the homeless Harry. Darn, that is saying quite a bit about the Weaselys.
*Harry then sleeps the sleep of the pure and blameless at the Leaky Cauldron inn.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-01-17 02:19 pm (UTC)Does she intend to evoke negative stereotypes by having Stan speak a lower-class accent? I can't answer for sure, but it does seem likely.
I would never dream of describing anyone’s accent as ‘lower-class’(!) and I dispute that speaking with an accent necessarily creates ‘negative’ associations. I know that accents do have associations and that there is research to show this, but the associations are complex and often positive, and while a Glasgow accent, say, may be associated with heavy drinking and a tendency to fight outside the pub of a Saturday night, it doesn’t mean that anyone applies those characteristics routinely to every Glaswegian they come across.
Stan has a regional accent and works as a bus conductor. This community has deduced that Stan works as a bus conductor because he has a regional accent. And to bring us round in a circle, the community concludes that the job of a bus conductor is demeaning because it is done by someone with a regional accent. Stan’s accent, and by implication Stan himself, is held to be “thick” and “low class”. There follows a number of flights of fancy about Stan’s backstory, wizarding world education policy, class prejudice at Hogwarts, Snape’s origins and ambitions, and Harry’s understanding of the world he lives in. It’s fun, but it can’t be serious. The Society for the Promotion of Working-class Welfare is but a step away!
The wizarding world is in many respects an evocation of a mythical pre-WWII Britain, and the HP books are steeped in the children’s literature of actual pre-WWII Britain but the reader is hardly expected to share the attitudes and views of that time, when society – or a powerful section of it - did still tend to categorise individuals by occupation and accent. The book was written in the 1990s when, as now, it was neither adequate nor acceptable to define an individual by his/her accent or occupation. I don’t for a moment suppose that the members of this community would apply the approach they’re using with Stan to someone with a regional accent or to a bus conductor they met in RL, or that they imagine it is the attitude the author would apply in her daily life. The question is, is it worthwhile to apply it to this character in this novel? For the purpose of having fun, certainly. For the purpose of evaluating and understanding the novel, well it’s a place to start.
I know I don’t really have to say this, but it is worth remembering that the HP books are novels, and as such they don’t operate on only one level with only one tone. Novelists can – and need and must - get away with a lot more than academics, or the compilers of train timetables, for example, and when it comes to comedy they can get away with just about anything. Yes, we’re meant – and allowed - to find Stan, what he says, and the way he says it amusing. Yes, like Hagrid, Stan is associated in part through his accent with simplicity and a certain innocence. In both cases this serves to reinforce that their mistreatment at the hands of the wizarding powers-that-be is poignant and unjustified and obviously wrong. It really does not imply that Harry is some sort of marxist manque, or that there is a conspiracy against the working-class at Hogwarts. Regional accents do not figure among the students at Hogwarts. One chapter in which a character based on a London bus conductor speaks with a London accent is one thing, but an entire novel – series of novels! - littered with ‘By ‘eck’, ‘Cor blimey’, ‘Innit?’, and ‘Oo arr’ would be quite another. (How many readers would be able to identify a particular regional accent, I wonder? How many could bear to read the thing at all?) We are given little information about the backgrounds of the students, and whether or not 'we' imagine them all as middle-class peas in a pod is up to us.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-17 03:20 pm (UTC)This indicates to me that you never experienced anyone making snap judgments on your speech or appearance. I have and its my sore point. Accents are the first weapon in class war. I've seen it up close.
Its not the accent that I have a problem with in the book, its the way it is presented. Why not include a teacher at Hogwarts with such an accent? Why not Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Neville or Luna? To write that it would be tedious to do so would be to denigrate the efforts of Mark Twain or Anthony Burgess and numerous other writers who have made their character's accents a point to notice in their books.
The fact that any noticeable "accent" is attributed to characters who seem to be the underclass is a little disturbing. The fact that this was a common practice in "pre-war literature" makes no difference to me. We no longer live in that world and hopefully are more egalitarian in our views. No doubt, 50 years in the future, people will be better and practice better standards in everything than we do now. To hark back to the past as a golden age is dangerous. Because the past wasn't always a panacea to everyone involved.
Yes, like Hagrid, Stan is associated in part through his accent with simplicity and a certain innocence.
Again that has a note of being infantilizing and patronizing to working class/middle class people. They are innocent and must be protected by someone like Harry. They may be there as a point against an unjust society. But so far none of the heroes, with the exception of Hermione (at times), think that there is anything wrong with the WW as is. As far as Harry is unconcerned now, the WW is fine by him (if he didn't have a psychopath stalking him).
Third time's the charm. (Sorry, kaskait!)
Date: 2007-01-17 03:28 pm (UTC)Re: Third time's the charm. (Sorry, kaskait!)
Date: 2007-01-17 03:57 pm (UTC)Re: Third time's the charm. (Sorry, kaskait!)
Date: 2007-01-17 05:36 pm (UTC)kaskait, I think you're actually making some of the same points I'm making. I'm sorry to go on, but you clearly dislike assumptions being made about you by others because of your accent, but surely you're doing just that yourself in relation to the fictional character, Stan Shunpike, no?
Keyword here being fictional. Stan doesn't exist, he doesn't have "feelings" that can be hurt, he's a figment of JKR's imagination, a construct to serve some kind of plotpoint in her story. The reason for why he talks the way he does, works with what he does, plays the part of the story that he does, cannot be found in "stan's background, personality and choices", because he isn't real. Instead, it can be found in JKR's conscious intentions, as well as the subconscious choices she's made when creating his character. That's what we're discussing here.
Re: Third time's the charm. (Sorry, kaskait!)
Date: 2007-01-17 06:01 pm (UTC)The reason for why he talks the way he does, works with what he does, plays the part of the story that he does ... can be found in JKR's conscious intentions, as well as the subconscious choices she's made when creating his character. That's what we're discussing here.
Would you like to say something about it then? But don't feel you have to. (woman ironing) (Oh God, oh God!)
no subject
Date: 2007-01-17 03:40 pm (UTC)Yes, we’re meant – and allowed - to find Stan, what he says, and the way he says it amusing. Yes, like Hagrid, Stan is associated in part through his accent with simplicity and a certain innocence. In both cases this serves to reinforce that their mistreatment at the hands of the wizarding powers-that-be is poignant and unjustified and obviously wrong.
But didn't you just lay out the stereotype people are identifying? The one that links funny accents to simplicity to innocence? It seems to be trying to have it both ways, here, saying that we can't deduce that the use of common class stereotypes drawn from a tradition that had certain attitudes about class in any way reinforces those beliefs, but it's okay to use those stereotypes to reinforce more flattering attitudes about class. But if I have to pick one or the other it seems like the books fit much more into the former idea, where cockney bus drivers and lunch trolley ladies are just comforting signs of a time gone by. Elitism is a theme that runs throughout the books, and sometimes it's criticized and sometimes it's not.
If Rowling is drawing on pre-WWII literature it makes even more sense for people to use their knowledge of the real world to understand the characters. They're saying that Hagrid and Stan, etc.--the ones whose accents are funny in ways Lucius Malfoy's is not--hold the same jobs that their Muggle counterparts would hold (blue collar and service jobs) while the kids moving towards middle to upper class lives don't speak like that and are served by them. That would indicate a class difference in the WW that mirrors our own, wouldn't it? Surely it can't be coincidence that the class differences happen to fall pretty much exactly the way they would in our world. I don't get anything in the writing that's challenging this or questioning why this is so.
Stan and Hagrid are both used to show mistreatment in the WW as *individuals* when they get into trouble. But even there aren't they still conforming to familiar stereotypes as unsophisticated cheerful innocents whom our heroes want to protect?
I don't think everybody has to be offended by these familiar stereotypes but I admit I can't find a way to really read them against type, or to not read their accents in the most straightforward way and contrast their accents, jobs and suggestions of different education to all the other people we know in the story. It seems too familiar and logical by Muggle standards to think this is a place where the WW is topsy-turvey. When it comes to stuff like that it seems like JKR's world is absolutely like our own.
Order, order!
Date: 2007-01-17 05:53 pm (UTC)If she's drawing on pre-WWII literature why would the things she draws from that literature suddenly not carry the meaning they did then?
Because that was then and this is now! (Sorry, had to say it!) Rowling is not a pre-WWII writer and we are not pre-WWII readers and HP is not a pre-WWII book. Affectionate parody? Of course!
I don't think everybody has to be offended by these familiar stereotypes...
But this community is palpably offended by the stereotypes it sees, and its response is to escalate the offence. For this community regional accent, and working class background and occupation have negative associations. Why should they?
They're saying that Hagrid and Stan, etc ... hold the same jobs that their Muggle counterparts would hold (blue collar and service jobs) while the kids moving towards middle to upper class lives don't speak like that and are served by them.
This is another circular argument based on the assumption that the students at Hogwarts are all something called middle-class and that Hagrid's and Stan's occupations are somehow unworthy. In what way are Stan and Hagrid serving a so-called higher class? Hagrid is a teacher just like Snape and McGonagall etc, Stan is a bloke with a job like anyone else.
...but I admit I can't find a way to really read them against type
But whose type is this? The wizarding world's, the author's, or (gently) yours?
But didn't you just lay out the stereotype people are identifying? The one that links funny accents to simplicity to innocence?
Yes. But, really, does this stereotype still hold? Of course not! Now it's something we can laugh at. This community is imbuing it with a meaning it no longer has.
Of course there is prejudice in our world, and of course assumptions are made, and of course this happens in the fictional HP world too, and it is dealt with (in some fashion) elsewhere in the story. (Waves hand airily.) JKR's world is like our own, but it's a lot of other things as well.
I was going to go but I do love a good discussion. (woman excommunicated)
Re: Order, order!
Date: 2007-01-17 08:02 pm (UTC)That's if you assume there's parody. Since it's not totally obvious, many just read it as affectionate. That seems to be one of the appeals of the book for a lot of people.
For this community regional accent, and working class background and occupation have negative associations. Why should they?
I think people are describing what they see the text connecting to working class accents. Some people in the thread seem to have and want more positive associations than they see in the text. At least that's what I thought they said.
This is another circular argument based on the assumption that the students at Hogwarts are all something called middle-class and that Hagrid's and Stan's occupations are somehow unworthy. In what way are Stan and Hagrid serving a so-called higher class? Hagrid is a teacher just like Snape and McGonagall etc, Stan is a bloke with a job like anyone else.
I don't see how it's circular to note where the kids at Hogwarts seem to fall in terms of class based on what we know of them--particularly given markers like the ones we're discussing here. "Stan's just a bloke with a job like everyone else" just chooses to not talk about the differences. Some jobs are different than others. (I believe Hagrid's position as teacher was noted elsewhere.)
But whose type is this? The wizarding world's, the author's, or (gently) yours?
The wizarding world's and the author's. I'm describing how the author's world is put together--a world that draws on many types being familiar to her audience as well. You seem to have acknowledged this when you described it as affectionate parody, but other times claim total ignorance about it going on.
Yes. But, really, does this stereotype still hold? Of course not! Now it's something we can laugh at. This community is imbuing it with a meaning it no longer has.
That's going to be in the eye of the beholder. Some people perhaps do feel this meaning is still present and react to it as such. (If the associations were all that remote the types wouldn't work at all.)
But even if you do find the class stereotypes funny rather than classist, it still makes that class system part of the structure. Two people can agree that this pattern exists in the text and disagree on whether it's supposed to be a satire or not, with person A saying, "Oh, she's being satirical, making fun of people who think this kind of thing is cute" and Person B saying, "She doesn't sound satirical to me. She sounds like she is one of those people who think this kind of thing is cute." Nobody is wrong for describing the pattern as existing any more than they would be for reading Viktor's accent and saying, "Viktor's supposed to be from Bulgaria but any standard B-movie Dracula-accent will do, apparently." You might not be personally offended by it, but I don't think it's worth trying to argue it into something else.
JKR's world is like our own, but it's a lot of other things as well.
Well, yeah. But aren't we looking at exactly what those other things are? It just seems like this whole discussion goes to something central to the books, the conflicted feelings about elitism throughout the books. It's not the only thing to look at in the books, but it seems pretty central to understanding the world. Sort of like how the Dursleys are made fun of for wanting to send Dudley to a silly old-fashioned school--much like the one at which the story is based.
Part I
Date: 2007-01-18 04:47 pm (UTC)I think people are describing what they see the text connecting to working class accents.
A reader's response to a book comes from what they see in the text and what they bring to the text themselves. I get the impression that in this community the latter predominates. In relation to Stan Shunpike is there really any suggestion in the text that Stan's job is less than anyone else's - than the Minister for Magic's, for example, or any of the passengers on his bus? Surely the community has decided for itself that Stan's job is somehow unsatisfactory, that being working-class and speaking with an accent is a lesser state of being? And even gone on to create it's own backstory to support the idea!
Sort of like how the Dursleys are made fun of for wanting to send Dudley to a silly old-fashioned school--much like the one at which the story is based.
Is this really what’s being done? The books make fun of the Dursleys continually but I thought this was an example of the Dursleys’ different treatment of Dudley and Harry. Harry, they have decided, is to attend the local, free, state school but Dudley is to attend what they consider a better school, a private (or possibly a particular form of private called public), fee-paying school. Both forms of school are parodied, or at least made fun of: Smeltings is a brutal, private school, with a ridiculous uniform and a violent ethos (the stick), while Stonewall High is a rough, state school, with a drab, grey uniform and a culture of violence (the head down the loo). Hogwart’s could be Stonewall High in a Smeltings setting, lol! I mean, I don’t think Rowling is proposing Hogwarts as a paradigm of the perfect school, either on its own merits or in comparison with Smeltings, is she?
I don't see how it's circular to note where the kids at Hogwarts seem to fall in terms of class based on what we know of them
But what do we know about the Hogwarts students, and does what we know really enable us to pronounce on their social class? As far as I can tell this community proposes a middle-class bias to Hogwarts, and to the author, only because regional accents are not made apparent in Hogwarts students’ dialogue. There is, however, evidence against a middle-class bias at Hogwarts in the books: the names of all wizarding children are put down for entry to Hogwarts at birth, and there is support available so that poor students can obtain the things they need. Has the community considered these points?
(continues below)
Part II
Date: 2007-01-18 04:53 pm (UTC)Re: Part II
Date: 2007-01-18 06:48 pm (UTC)However, when we don't agree, we don't call the other person's behaviour 'sad' or suggest their reading experience is less rewarding than our own.
I wouldn't like to think you're just trolling us, but the way you're addressing people in this community really suggests it.
Re: Part II
Date: 2007-01-18 07:45 pm (UTC)('You' here refers to the community not to any individual.)
Don’t you think, though, that if you claim you're doing more than having a laugh the problem with this affirmatory approach is that you only find what you’ve already decided is there? Wouldn't this be a pretty futile activity, and also sad if it meant you missed things in the books that could make reading them more rewarding and add to the sum of your pleasure?
Is this worth thinking about at all?
I don't know what trolling is, perhaps it is what I'm doing. I thought what I was doing was asking questions. I came to this community and was attacked, you know. Is it not permitted to question here? (wi)
Re: Part II
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2007-01-19 10:09 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: Part II
Date: 2007-01-18 11:47 pm (UTC)So by your perspective, they're sad and their activity is futile.
Great, now they (or rather, we) know. Is your mission accomplished now?
I'm not sure how you feel you've been attacked, since you've wandered in here, insulted the entire community and the way they chose to spend their time, accused us of prejudice and disregarded being banned - I'd say everyone has been tolerant far beyond what can be reasonably expected of them.
It's perfectly permitted to 'question' recappers and commenters' - there's no hive mind with a list of proscribed opinions.
It however, is not permitted to come into a community, the purpose of which has already been explained to you multiple times and patronisingly explain to them how they're missing and how there's much more to find - coincidentally what you have already decided is or isn't there.
(I'm also a little confused as to how you seem so convinced of your own originality when you don't seem to have committed to an intellectual opinion beyond 'I really really like Rowling and have created vast, intricate, contrasting explanations to explain why everything in the books rocks and is exactly as it's presented!' You do realise that that like, 90% of HP communities are patterned after your basic approach? Isn't it a pretty futile activity to remain here among the classist bullies?
Neither have you particularly convinced me of the pseudo-liberal cred you seem desperate to flash when you've replied to kaskait's RL experience of prejudice by accusing her of hypocrisy and getting concerned that she's not respecting a fictional character; as if it's much easier to get aerated and defend amusing fictional, stereotypical minorities than it is actually converse with real live ones.)
No-one here has a habit of trolling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll) general HP discussion communities and telling them how they may think the books are actually well-written and enjoyable but are in actual fact incorrect and if we just explained to them that they've misread and although they don't know it, are actually miserable with their inferior readings.
Please don't do the equivalent to us.
I'm asking you, politely, as the mod, to leave and cease replying here.
Re: Part II
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2007-01-19 10:26 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: Part II
From:Re: Part II
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2007-01-19 11:44 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: Part II
Date: 2007-01-18 11:51 pm (UTC)I don't know why you are assuming this.
We haven't.
'Trolling' is making personal comments in order to offend people. I believe you if you say that's not what you're doing, but that is what it looks like. Nobody has attacked you, and nobody has made any personal comments about you, but you have made personal comments about others. Again, I believe you if you say it's not your intention to offend, and since I came into this discussion quite late I hope you'll believe me when I say it really does look like you're attacking the others.
It's absolutely okay to question anything here, it's just not okay to do that.
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-19 01:21 am (UTC)If two people disagree on what's in the text, each's way--to that person--is going to seem more from the text, because we're not aware of our own biases as much. There's always somebody in fandom explaining to you how you must "worked" for your honest reaction, because otherwise you would have had their honest reaction instead!
I get the impression that in this community the latter predominates. In relation to Stan Shunpike is there really any suggestion in the text that Stan's job is less than anyone else's - than the Minister for Magic's, for example, or any of the passengers on his bus?
Not "less than" if by that you mean Stan is considered less human by the text. Less than in the way it is in our world and the WW. It's nice to say that a job as a bus driver is the same as being the PM, but there are actually differences between the two jobs, and they often reflect different backgrounds and classes (and the person of one class has more choice between the jobs). This seems just as given in the WW as it is in our world. That's why NEWTS are important and Stan brags about being the PM.
Nobody's saying Stan's accent makes him unworthy of Hogwarts but the opposite.It seems a little affected to pretend one's occupation doesn't affect one's life, and that one's background and education isn't usually tied in with one's occupation (which is a different issue than personal happiness). Apparently this is so in the WW, despite the quill.
Is this really what’s being done? The books make fun of the Dursleys continually but I thought this was an example of the Dursleys’ different treatment of Dudley and Harry.
It's the way it read to me. I thought Dudley's uniform and the Smeltings tradition was obviously being held up to ridicule, along with the Dursleys' pretention and their dressing him up in that silly outfit. I don't think requires projecting onto the text, even if not everyone sees it. Hogwarts isn't perfect, but I don't think the text seems conflicted about its being the best. I don't see how it's different than noting the Harry's burning hatred and power of love thing.
But what do we know about the Hogwarts students, and does what we know really enable us to pronounce on their social class?
I would assume people are basing it on the students whose background we know about and other textual signs like that (it's not just readers seeing a contrast with Stan). I'd be more worried the person not making these connections was missing something.
There is, however, evidence against a middle-class bias at Hogwarts in the books: the names of all wizarding children are put down for entry to Hogwarts at birth...Has the community considered these points?
I don't know if "the community" has considered anything, but some people in it have obviously noticed how JKR uses accents in her characterization, which is a much stronger part of the text. They're looking at the story more than Hogwarts as an institution.
I mentioned the way that the other person's reading always seems more labored, and this is how this seems to me. I'd have to do more work to "correct" this impression when it seems like the author's peopled her world the way she wants to just fine without my trying to fit it into a PC ideal just because somebody challenged something. When I think of the students I think of all the students I know, and when I think of WW bus drivers I think of Stan, I think more due to the author's choices than any bias from my own life.
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-19 01:43 am (UTC)I also agree with you that this kind of community increases my enjoyment of the text: I mean, without it frankly I would never have noticed Stan Shunpike much, because he didn't interest me particularly and so I felt callous indifference about his job and accent. But hearing what strikes other people is always both exciting and challenging.
Re: Part I
From:Re: Part II
Date: 2007-01-19 01:21 am (UTC)I can't speak for anyone else's experience but this type of community has actually greatly increased my enjoyment (and sometimes opinion) of the books so it must be doing something right. I like pulling apart how the books work, even if there's something that doesn't. I know there's a strain of thought in fandom that this ruins the enjoyment of canon, but that's just as bizarre to me as this type of thing is to them.
On the other hand, it’s probably a good way of keeping disputatious oafs like me at a distance
How disputatious are you being? Because while I certainly think it's possible to argue against something that somebody else here thinks is a flaw or doesn't work, the "negative" reading might be negative but it still seems coherent. The "positive" one seems to jump around and contradict itself, or deny things that seem kind of dishonest or pointless to deny. The first reading seems more like the books I know, even if I disagree with points of it. The other threatens to become non-offensive mush.
Re: Part II
Date: 2007-01-19 02:00 pm (UTC)Same here.
HP is the only fandom I know anything about, and pretty much only the LJ bit of it. The “negative” approach seems to prevail on LJ – perhaps it is a reaction to the prevalence of a squee! approach elsewhwere? You’re absolutely right, the “positive”, squee! approach would make the books become non-offensive mush!
My problem with with what I’ve experienced of the “negative” approach is that it comes over as rather monotone. It seems to demand a, well, deathly uniformity from the story. I read some comments and then try to imagine the story if it conformed to their requirements, and my mind boggles and all vital signs fade! An overly negative approach is in as much danger of descending into absurdity or tedium as an overly positive one. It'd unremarkable but fair to say that it’s a good idea to start with a critical approach as opposed to an uncritical one, objective as opposed to either positive or negative. (wi)
Re: Part II
From:Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-18 06:41 pm (UTC)The community has not decided this for itself.
Hagrid and Stan, the ones with menial jobs which are perceived as being lower-class, have traditional lower-class accents as well. This is all that has been pointed out. It happens in the real world and in JKR's world: it's not fair in either world, and it does seem to be the same in both worlds, with the additional factor (which may or may not sit wrong with people, I don't care much myself) that these lower class, differently accented people are played largely for laughs.
The community are not proposing anything: the community are noting something evident in the books. I agree that it makes little sense considering that every magically gifted student is invited to Hogwarts. The support available for students was not given to Ron, for example, since he has parents even though they didn't provide him with a working wand in CoS. Maybe it's only available for orphans, and poor people with living parents with substandard materials achieve lower marks and thus worse jobs, maybe things like Auror training or politics require money or contacts.
I'm inclined to think it's a lapse of logic in the books. There are lapses of logic in all books. But the community has just noted something that's in there: we have not made stuff up.
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-18 08:36 pm (UTC)Well of course Minister for Magic is more prestigious and better paid! It just doesn't make being a bus conductor worthless or as you put it, menial and lower-class. I find these words loaded, do you not see this? This is just the thing I'm trying to get at. It really seems that the community has started off with these, well, value judgements and then accused the books of having them. The community holds blue-collar occupations to be menial, and regional accents to be lower-class (what a phrase to read in 2007!), sees Stan Shunpike, and Bingo!* And then, off it goes inventing a whole lot of stuff about working-class students not being encouraged at Hogwarts and God knows what. It's like some Frankenstein's monster being patched together! I don't know, perhaps I am just talking bollocks.
I think you've forgotten that Hagrid is a teacher. I wonder whether Charlie's job of dragon-keeper is blue-collar or white-collar?
we have not made stuff up
Somebody up there complained of Stan sucking up to Fudge. Er ... he asked Fudge what he'd called Neville ... ?
(*What? Stan's got a dog?)
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-18 11:27 pm (UTC)Everyone has given you the reasons why they see this in the text. Some people do not agree with me. But its there as written, Stan has a noticeable accent, he works as a bus conductor, he is over obsequious to Fudge and he has lied about his position to a Veela Cheerleader.
I'm a minority and I've come across all these problems. Just because you haven't or don't see it, doesn't mean they no longer apply.
There is nothing wrong with being a bus conductor but it isn't a job most people would choose for their children. In the books, if being a bus conductor was just as good as being Minister, well then the holy grail of all things good, the Weaseley family would have bus conductors in their family. They don't. And I don't recall Molly ever desiring her sons to forward their CV's to the Knight Bus Company. Nor do I remember any of the heroes seriously perusing pamphlets for the Knight Bus Company in fifth year.
Plus I don't ever recall there being any elections for the Minister of Magic job. Never. The job is appointed. You have to have family connections and important friends to get this kind of job. Now do you think Stan has a chance to be Minister of Magic? I don't know, it depends on what the writer decides, but at this point, he is certainly good enough to be someone's simple patsy.
Hagrid was thrown out of school. Again he was used as a patsy. And because of what he is half giant, everyone in the books thought he was capable of opening the chamber. He held a grounds keeper spot for many, many years before he was made a teacher. However I don't think his lessons are that successful or that he is any good as a teacher. BUT he knew someone important to get the job. He didn't apply for it.
If class wasn't an issue in this book, why are there pure-bloods, why are their crazy Death Eaters, why aren't there elections, why doesn't anyone of any consequence have an accent like Stan's or Hagrid's? We are noting, discussing and sometimes mocking what is in the books. Its all there as written, no one is making anything up.
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-18 11:44 pm (UTC)Nobody's saying being a bus driver is worthless. You are putting words in people's mouths. These are not value judgements created by the community on some weird whim.
This is an extreme example, but how would you feel if the black character Dean Thomas came in and said 'Dis heah niggah tired from working in the fields all day?' JKR is using stereotypes here.
People working in the jobs traditionally perceived as lower class (like bus drivers) are shown as having accents traditionally perceived as lower class (like Stan's or Hagrid's). These people seem chiefly played for laughs. That's all that's been pointed out.
Re: Part I
Date: 2007-01-19 01:48 am (UTC)Well, now that I can't help but keep following the logic down the rabbit hole, I'm picturing some Bell Curve logic where that group "represented" by Hagrid et al. were given the exact same chances via the magic quill and we just still wind up with other segments of the society overrepresented at the top schools.