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

Re: Umbridge

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

I'm with you there. I can see Umbridge being the dark representative of Hufflepuff. A person can be hard-working, diligent, dedicated, patient, and loyal - and still commit terrible and atrocious acts. A Hufflepuff can have their own vision of what's "fair" and be faithful to all the wrong sorts of values. It would've been a great way to represent how each house in Hogwarts has a sinister side, and how cruel people come from every background.

But nope. Umbridge is evil, racist, and irredeemable - so let's make her a Slytherin! Obviously.

And better yet, let's have another example of an unscrupulous Slytherin half-blood, because... why not? It's not only Slytherin pure-bloods who are prejudiced and racist, even those Slytherin half-bloods are infected with poisonous ideals!

I'm shocked JKR didn't take it a step further and had racist Slytherin muggleborns just to twist the "All Slytherins are Horrible" knife further in.

Re: Umbridge

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

Not only that, Umbridge in Book Five gives no indication that she is a blood bigot in the sense that she looks down on muggleborns, or even muggles. She does not object to non-wizard blood; she objects to non-human blood. As far as we know, her position on the Muggleborn Registration Committee in Book Seven is just a bureaucratic post. It’s her job to suppress muggleborns, and as a loyal bureaucrat she is conscientiously doing her job. When she’s on her own, it’s non-human sapients—giants and centaurs—that she finds objectionable.

It’s sad how Rowling has gone out of her way to simplify her universe. All Slytherins are evil and all evil people are Slytherins. All prejudice is anti-muggleborn bigotry, and all bigotry is anti-muggleborn. And this is happening in a culture that views actual muggles as amusing or dangerous animals, and is right to do so.

Thank God for meta and fan fiction. Most of it is trash (Sturgeon’s Law!), but occasionally one finds a fan analyst or author who can really open up this cosmos and make it into something that is still fascinating decades later.

Re: Umbridge

[torchedsong.livejournal.com]

Umbridge's utmost loyalty and dedication to what she deems to be right and fair would've made her a formidable and frightening Hufflepuff. I don't recall if she outright voiced racism against muggleborns, but she did enjoy her position of power in the Ministry. Her racism was more pronounced towards non-human beings. And she wasn't a Death Eater, although she supported Voldemort's regime.

On the other hand, JKR did write on Pottermore an article about Umbridge and claimed Umbridge despised her mother for her Muggle background and her Squib brother. So there's that, although I'm not sure if Pottermore counts as canon or not, even if JKR writes some of the articles herself.

I agree on how sad it is to paint nearly all Slytherins with the same shadowy brush. Before the last book came out, I thought JKR would do a role reversal with the Gryffindors and Slytherins and show how both houses have their faults - and how both need to reconcile and cooperate with one another to take Voldemort down. I thought at least one Slytherin character would be redeemed and Harry would have to work with a Slytherin adversary (Snape or Draco) to win the war. But... it didn't happen. Harry remained the same, the Gryffindors remained morally righteous, and the Slytherins remained morally dubious at best and evil at worst. The "reveal" of Dumbledore being morally ambiguous wasn't a big deal because he remained a favorable mentor figure who did everything for Good's sake.

And yes, Rowling herself has no interest in writing or portraying muggles in the HP universe. She regards them as boring as well. As mentioned above, we learn barely anything about Hermione's parents, and Harry and Hermione don't get to bond over their shared muggle background.

Sorry for the rant, but the disappointment still stings to this day. I'm thankful for fan fiction, meta, and discussions as well. It's why I got back into the HP fandom in the first place.