Feeling guilty about being disinterested in or disliking Rowling's female characters

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

The title is self-explanatory. After rereading HP, I realized how let down I was about the dearth of interesting and/or likable female characters. As someone who has a long list of favorite female characters from various books, movies, TV shows, and video games, the women in the Harry Potter books leave me cold or bored.

Now, granted, the male characters aren’t spectacular either. Harry is passive, Ron is average, Draco is a waste, Snape is a mess, Dumbledore is also a mess, Voldemort is a standard villain, and plenty of other male characters are either boring or obnoxious.

And yet, as disappointing as some of the guys are, I can still find something about them interesting or engaging. I can see their potential or humanity, no matter how static, simplistic, or irritating their characterization is (well, maybe with the exception of James; I can’t stand him no matter how hard I try - and I’ve tried.)

Maybe I’m being sexist and judging the women too harshly. Maybe I’m not giving Rowling enough acclaim for trying to write a variety of female characters in a story revolving around a young boy. Maybe I’m excusing the poor characterization and lack of depth in the male characters when they’re far from complex either.

Whatever the reason is - it is what it is. Even as a young girl who enjoyed the books, I only gravitated towards Hermione and Luna. McGonagall was the sole female authority figure I found respectable. The rest?

Umbridge and Bellatrix are stereotypical images of evil. Narcissa is all about her son. Lavender and her friends are silly girly girls. Pansy is a mean girl. Millicent is an ugly mean girl. Fleur is French and beautiful. Katie and the other Quidditch gals are just there. Tonks is bubbly until she falls for Lupin. Cho is the first love interest. Molly is Harry’s overbearing surrogate mother. Petunia is Lily’s awful sister. Rita is the “pushy” career woman. Trelawney is an oddball. Sprout might as well be nonexistent. Merope is the birther of Evil Incarnate.

And then there’s the two female characters that I dislike the most: Ginny and Lily. They’re depicted as wonderful young women we’re meant to admire and adore. And yet, I’d take rude Pansy and crazy Bellatrix over them any day. Even Harry, who is portrayed as “amazing” at times, is given some flaws and criticisms within the narrative. Not everyone adores Harry and he’s called out by other characters (including his friends) for his behavior. But Ginny and Lily are overwhelmingly worshiped to the point where I can feel Rowling hitting me over the head on how I must approve of their superiority awesome personalities.

Writing this post is not doing any favors for the feminist in me. Strange thing is, from what I’ve read, JKR considers herself a feminist. But her female characters are not compelling or well written enough. Her male characters fall flat as well, but at least with the boys and men, it seems like she tried to give them depth. With the exception of Hermione, I get the sense that JKR didn’t bother to go any deeper with the girls and women. (And it’s telling how Hermione is an Author Avatar and the female character JKR put the most effort into.)

Well, this bitter rambling post has gone long enough, so I’ll end it here. Am I being too harsh and unfair or is there something off about the way JKR writes women? Or is it no different than the way she writes men? I know this topic is far from new, but I'm forevermore late to the party.

Comments

[sunnyskywalker]

Her female characters usually lack character arcs or subplots of their own. And they usually have a lot less backstory or interesting details that you can use as a springboard for imagination. It's harder to imagine what they're like when Harry isn't in the room.

I think more often, the male characters get to exist for themselves, and the female characters react to them. It's very unbalanced.

Teachers: McGonagall... is often harsh, occasionally encouraging, and that's about it despite her page time. Umbridge is a tyrant, and then she gets kicked out, and then she shows up later but doesn't really do much. Poor Trelawney is literally a plot device--the only things she does that affect anything are things she can't remember! Other than that, she stays the same for 16 years as far as we see. Charity Burbage is a redshirt whose name we never even heard until she showed up to die. I think Sprout's big moment is growing mandrakes, and maybe giving Harry points that one time.

Compare to the massive plot relevance and emotional journeys and page time and overall detail we get for Dumbledore, Snape, Lupin, Hagrid...

For Ministry employees, compare Crouch Sr. and Amelia Bones. One of them has a rise and fall and mystery, and one shows up for a scene and then dies.

Villains (I'll leave out Voldemort): Bellatrix is fanatical and evil and then dies. Narcissa is rude but also a mom who loves her son; I guess at least she gets to do two things that affect the plot in the two books where she's anything more than a cameo, so that's something. Lucius inadvertently kick-starts CoS because Dobby hates him enough to work against him with Harry's help. Then he gains political influence, rises in Voldemort's favor, goes to prison, becomes a prisoner in his own house, and finally decides being a dad is more important than taking over the world. Barty Jr. is crucial to the plot of an entire book and interacts with Harry regularly, and you can see him go from scared teenager (who was a DE, but a scared one who nearly died) to Most Devoted Servant. Peter was a friend who betrayed Harry's dad, then hid, then resurrected Voldemort, then hesitated to kill Harry because even if he didn't get a proper resolution, he at least had inner conflict. Lockhart was pretty one-note, but then he shows up for a cameo later that adds pathos to his story.

Even in the Trio, Harry gets his whole attempt at a hero's journey, Ron fights to overcome jealousy and his feelings of inadequacy, and Hermione... well, she gets more ruthless, I guess? Er, gets a boyfriend? But she pretty much fills the same role, so you have to really work to knock her story into any kind of journey. It takes filling in a lot of gaps. That one is particularly galling, because Hermione could have had a better developed character arc with probably very little more work.

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

Her female characters usually lack character arcs or subplots of their own. And they usually have a lot less backstory or interesting details that you can use as a springboard for imagination. It's harder to imagine what they're like when Harry isn't in the room.

I think more often, the male characters get to exist for themselves, and the female characters react to them. It's very unbalanced.

Yes, I agree with you. The men have a stronger presence in the story and seem to have interesting lives separate from Harry. Even if they aren't written to their full potential, they do provide something beyond merely existing in Harry's world. They also have more of an emotional impact on Harry in general, whether positive or negative. Harry has numerous male mentor figures, father figures, teachers, friends, acquaintances, and enemies, in contrast with the few important female figures in his life.

I agree with the rest of your post and the comparisons to be made between male and female characters, such as Narcissa and Lucius. Even though Narcissa gets to accomplish a few things of her own, she's still strongly connected back to her son and defined by her role as a mother in a way that Lucius isn't defined by his role as a father. I understand JKR has a lot of respect for motherhood, but sometimes through her female characters, it comes across as if being a mother is the greatest achievement for a woman, more so than being a father is for a man.

Even in the Trio, Harry gets his whole attempt at a hero's journey, Ron fights to overcome jealousy and his feelings of inadequacy, and Hermione... well, she gets more ruthless, I guess? Er, gets a boyfriend? But she pretty much fills the same role, so you have to really work to knock her story into any kind of journey.

I think Hermione is considered one of JKR's best characters and is often placed on the top of "Most Popular HP Characters" lists. Despite her popularity in comparison to Harry and Ron, she does get pushed to the side sometimes in the books. Harry considers her like a sister, but it's his friendship with Ron that takes precedence in the trio.

And, as you've said, Ron and Harry at least attempt to have their own emotional hardships. With Hermione, the closest we get is when she has to Obliviate her parents. But we don't know her family or care for them, so her choice to follow Harry over her parents lacks impact for me. Hermione can be driven and ruthless, but it sometimes seems like her ambition is more important when it can help Harry and serve Harry's life instead of her own.

[sunnyskywalker]

Hermione's case is especially frustrating because there's so much that could have made for a coherent arc. Trying to find her place in the magical world as a Muggle-born, for instance. There's a lot of material, and hints at her struggle (the whole SPEW thing definitely showed a different cultural mindset, e.g., and you could probably do a lot with how she sometimes works through Harry, as with starting the DA, rather than in her own right). But what was her arc? How did this develop over time? Ron's and Harry's were pretty clearly defined. Hermione was very hard done by, I think. Maybe she got stuck delivering so much exposition that she didn't have time to have a fully-developed character arc. It's so unbalanced.