![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oyceterFirst impressions here. I reread this in preparation for book 6, as I realized that I pretty much didn't remember anything. I really started reading HP when the fourth book came out, and since there was such a big time gap between the fourth and the fifth books, I've reread the first four books a few times, at least. Also, it helped that I used to keep them back at home in Taiwan, where I'd visit for vacations and have much more time for rereading.
I have always been rather irked by Harry's rule-breaking, probably because that just puts an instinctive horror in me. And the house system for Hogwarts drives me crazy. I hate that the teachers, especially the Heads of the Houses, treat their own houses differently (Snape and McGonagall are the worst), and I particularly dislike how Slytherin and Gryffindor are typecast. Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw mostly seem exempt from this because they are not the main rivalry Houses. But, yes, it is rather annoying that all the main characters are Gryffindors and that all the nasty ones are Slytherins. I rather wish that Rowling would put in some sort of subplot in which there were nice Slytherins. Or even nasty ones, but ones whose parents weren't Death Eaters. I mean, can one divide black from white more clearly?
While I'm not particularly grief-stricken or anything over Sirius' death, I did feel bad for Harry. But to be honest, I was also rather glad that Harry's rashness and Sirius' had a price, because it seems very unfair that over the first four books, over and over, Harry makes these not-so-great decisions and they always turn out well for him. He gets patted on the head and justified again and again. And I always wonder at how he gets himself into these very adult scrapes all the time. I mean, I understand that this is a YA adventure trope, but it is rather more difficult to justify over five books.
Anyhow. I was still glad to see that Hermione's support of SPEW is justified and that the uglier undertones of the wizarding world are being brought to the forefront. I've really hated the treatment of the elves through the books, especially the whole "they don't want to be free" undertone, which reminds me way too much of the justifications for slavery. The point that Dumbledore makes about the giants wanting to join Voldemort more because of the restrictions that the wizarding world has placed on them is a good one. It's not that it in any way justifies attacks on the wizarding world, but I am glad that Rowling isn't implicitly supporting class distinctions or race distinctions, even though she does horribly horribly irritating things with the Slytherins.
Note, I am not rooting for the Slytherins. I am also not a part of HP fandom at all, with the exception of reading a few fics. But it really makes one wonder if anyone good ever came out of Slytherin and what the good of the house is, except to play villain. Anyhow, it made me glad when Phineas Nigellus showed up, and while he was unhelpful and snarky, he seemed genuinely affected by Sirius' death.
I continue to enjoy the fine line that Rowling walks with Snape. She never makes him sympathetic, but he continues to be on the side of the Order, despite his hatred of Harry and his sarcasm and obvious dislike for a whole lot of people. And I liked how even though she showed that painful scene from his past, she also showed him being a jerk to Lily, because he isn't poor and misunderstood. I also liked the uglier view of the Marauders, because Harry's growing up, and it makes sense that when you grow up, you start to see your parents making mistakes and being human.
I'm also glad that the girls get a larger and larger role to play. I remember reading an article somewhere around the first time that HP wasn't very female friendly, particularly the first book, but I think it's become more and more so. Hermione remains the sole voice of common sense at times...why in the world does Harry not listen to her more? Ron is still mostly firmly stuck in the sidekick role, but I was glad that he got his own chance to shine. And I'm glad that Ginny has a backbone as well.
Umbridge frightens the hell out of me, because that sort of administrative evil, the irrational rules created just to ban something that the administrators hadn't thought of, those are all things that I remember from school. Ok, our admninistrators weren't evil. But there were often times when they'd create rules after the fact to cover situations that had arisen, and this drove me absolutely nuts. It just seems entirely unfair to create a rule just to deal with a specific situation. So I enjoyed reading the school in revolt part, despite the continual thread in the books of disobedience of authority being a good thing. It's echoed in the fact that the Ministry is being not only deliberately clueless, but also ignorantly evil in its own way, miscarrying justice and partaking in censorship. I'm not quite sure what to make of this undertone. I think things like administrations and rules have their place, and while Umbridge and the Ministry were very much abusing their power, I dislike the constant flaunting of rules of caution in the book. The casual correlation of authority with evil seems very Buffyesque to me, and I wish that the view were a little more nuanced than that. I guess it is getting a little more so, now that Hermione is quite clearly the voice of common sense and not the nagging shrew that Harry and Ron often think her as.
But it does seem like the wizarding establishment and the establishment of government must change -- the inherent racism in the system and the typecasting of the House system seem bound to go down.
Neville continues to be one of my favorite characters (the others are Snape, McGonagall and Hermione, but I am most emotionally attached to Neville). And... I hope that they will make more of him being the other possible person of the prophecy later on, but I somehow doubt it. Harry is so obviously Speshul. Actually, that's why I originally didn't want to continue on with the series.
Also, a note to Rowling: having the big climactic infodump be on the prophecy on Harry and Voldemort may have been really suspenseful for Harry and Dumbledore, but it sure wasn't for me! Gee, I never would have guessed that Harry and Voldemort were going to have a final facedown. *rolls eyes* Sorry. Sometimes the HP series does these great things, other times it feels like Rowling should have read DWJ's The Tough Guide to Fantasyland for including some of the hoariest cliches in the fantasy genre. Oh well. I like her characters and her world enough to be reading obsessively anyway, so obviously something is working.
Honestly, though, if Harry doesn't stop acting like Fitz from the Farseer series (aka being really deliberately obstinate and stupid), I am going to kick him. I hate that a giant part of this book happened because of the Big Secret plot and the fact that if anyone ever said anything to Harry or if Harry told anyone anything, something could have been stopped. I am also rather amazed that Harry didn't find Sirius' gift and realize that if he had found it earlier, he could have used that to contact Sirius and may not have been lied to by Kreacher.
Anyhow, I tore through the book regardless, and now I am quite eager to read the sixth one, which is still on its way from the UK, sigh.
- My personal history of HP (spoilers for 1-4, sort of)
I have always been rather irked by Harry's rule-breaking, probably because that just puts an instinctive horror in me. And the house system for Hogwarts drives me crazy. I hate that the teachers, especially the Heads of the Houses, treat their own houses differently (Snape and McGonagall are the worst), and I particularly dislike how Slytherin and Gryffindor are typecast. Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw mostly seem exempt from this because they are not the main rivalry Houses. But, yes, it is rather annoying that all the main characters are Gryffindors and that all the nasty ones are Slytherins. I rather wish that Rowling would put in some sort of subplot in which there were nice Slytherins. Or even nasty ones, but ones whose parents weren't Death Eaters. I mean, can one divide black from white more clearly?
While I'm not particularly grief-stricken or anything over Sirius' death, I did feel bad for Harry. But to be honest, I was also rather glad that Harry's rashness and Sirius' had a price, because it seems very unfair that over the first four books, over and over, Harry makes these not-so-great decisions and they always turn out well for him. He gets patted on the head and justified again and again. And I always wonder at how he gets himself into these very adult scrapes all the time. I mean, I understand that this is a YA adventure trope, but it is rather more difficult to justify over five books.
Anyhow. I was still glad to see that Hermione's support of SPEW is justified and that the uglier undertones of the wizarding world are being brought to the forefront. I've really hated the treatment of the elves through the books, especially the whole "they don't want to be free" undertone, which reminds me way too much of the justifications for slavery. The point that Dumbledore makes about the giants wanting to join Voldemort more because of the restrictions that the wizarding world has placed on them is a good one. It's not that it in any way justifies attacks on the wizarding world, but I am glad that Rowling isn't implicitly supporting class distinctions or race distinctions, even though she does horribly horribly irritating things with the Slytherins.
Note, I am not rooting for the Slytherins. I am also not a part of HP fandom at all, with the exception of reading a few fics. But it really makes one wonder if anyone good ever came out of Slytherin and what the good of the house is, except to play villain. Anyhow, it made me glad when Phineas Nigellus showed up, and while he was unhelpful and snarky, he seemed genuinely affected by Sirius' death.
I continue to enjoy the fine line that Rowling walks with Snape. She never makes him sympathetic, but he continues to be on the side of the Order, despite his hatred of Harry and his sarcasm and obvious dislike for a whole lot of people. And I liked how even though she showed that painful scene from his past, she also showed him being a jerk to Lily, because he isn't poor and misunderstood. I also liked the uglier view of the Marauders, because Harry's growing up, and it makes sense that when you grow up, you start to see your parents making mistakes and being human.
I'm also glad that the girls get a larger and larger role to play. I remember reading an article somewhere around the first time that HP wasn't very female friendly, particularly the first book, but I think it's become more and more so. Hermione remains the sole voice of common sense at times...why in the world does Harry not listen to her more? Ron is still mostly firmly stuck in the sidekick role, but I was glad that he got his own chance to shine. And I'm glad that Ginny has a backbone as well.
Umbridge frightens the hell out of me, because that sort of administrative evil, the irrational rules created just to ban something that the administrators hadn't thought of, those are all things that I remember from school. Ok, our admninistrators weren't evil. But there were often times when they'd create rules after the fact to cover situations that had arisen, and this drove me absolutely nuts. It just seems entirely unfair to create a rule just to deal with a specific situation. So I enjoyed reading the school in revolt part, despite the continual thread in the books of disobedience of authority being a good thing. It's echoed in the fact that the Ministry is being not only deliberately clueless, but also ignorantly evil in its own way, miscarrying justice and partaking in censorship. I'm not quite sure what to make of this undertone. I think things like administrations and rules have their place, and while Umbridge and the Ministry were very much abusing their power, I dislike the constant flaunting of rules of caution in the book. The casual correlation of authority with evil seems very Buffyesque to me, and I wish that the view were a little more nuanced than that. I guess it is getting a little more so, now that Hermione is quite clearly the voice of common sense and not the nagging shrew that Harry and Ron often think her as.
But it does seem like the wizarding establishment and the establishment of government must change -- the inherent racism in the system and the typecasting of the House system seem bound to go down.
Neville continues to be one of my favorite characters (the others are Snape, McGonagall and Hermione, but I am most emotionally attached to Neville). And... I hope that they will make more of him being the other possible person of the prophecy later on, but I somehow doubt it. Harry is so obviously Speshul. Actually, that's why I originally didn't want to continue on with the series.
Also, a note to Rowling: having the big climactic infodump be on the prophecy on Harry and Voldemort may have been really suspenseful for Harry and Dumbledore, but it sure wasn't for me! Gee, I never would have guessed that Harry and Voldemort were going to have a final facedown. *rolls eyes* Sorry. Sometimes the HP series does these great things, other times it feels like Rowling should have read DWJ's The Tough Guide to Fantasyland for including some of the hoariest cliches in the fantasy genre. Oh well. I like her characters and her world enough to be reading obsessively anyway, so obviously something is working.
Honestly, though, if Harry doesn't stop acting like Fitz from the Farseer series (aka being really deliberately obstinate and stupid), I am going to kick him. I hate that a giant part of this book happened because of the Big Secret plot and the fact that if anyone ever said anything to Harry or if Harry told anyone anything, something could have been stopped. I am also rather amazed that Harry didn't find Sirius' gift and realize that if he had found it earlier, he could have used that to contact Sirius and may not have been lied to by Kreacher.
Anyhow, I tore through the book regardless, and now I am quite eager to read the sixth one, which is still on its way from the UK, sigh.
- My personal history of HP (spoilers for 1-4, sort of)
(no subject)
Mon, Jul. 18th, 2005 12:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, Jul. 18th, 2005 06:37 am (UTC)Remember, this isn't an adult book with a balanced view, and JKR is writing in the Roald Dahl vein where the narrative voice is firmly on the side of the kids - adults are unfair, other kids are unfair, the world is unfair.
This is an area where she's less successful that she could be, mostly because she saves the truly Dahlesque moments for the Muggle world, with life at the Dursleys', and makes Hogwarts the area that feels more "real" - I'm seeing the same structures in parallel with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, where the pre-factory sections are dull, drear, and ever-so-grey. Charlie's family isn't just poor, it's so poor that the only thing they eat is cabbage soup. The grandparents aren't just old, they're so old that the never leave the one bed. And so on. And then Charlie enters the world of the factory, and it's Wonderland - Paradise from the child's point of view, where you can do practically anything without interference from grownups, indeed you're encouraged by one of them. Paradise has a dark ide, as all kids know, and if you go too far, you get punished, but even the Oompa-Loompa songs explicitly lay the original blame for kids' bad behavior at the feet of the parents - the underlying logic of the world is still kids vs. parents.
The problem with that is that the sort of structure there doesn't hold up too well to long-term stories with character development and whatnot, because it depend on the basic unreality of the story - you can't lift the lid and poke around the engine too much without realizing it's a perpetual-motion engine and cannot function according to the laws of physics. Well, ok, I let that metaphor get away with me, but I think you probably get the idea I'm getting across.
JKR doesn't go over-the-top far enough to make it perfectly clear that the favoritism and unfairness are metaphorical, unlike Dahl, and the long-term development of the characters and the world also serve to bring it down to earth. I don't know if, in the hands of a more skilled writer, it would be possible to construct a Dahlesque world and keep it going through seven fat books.
(no subject)
Mon, Jul. 18th, 2005 06:39 am (UTC)Meant to say kids vs. adults, not parents: the Wonka trickster figure is also unfair, arbitrary, secretive, and against the kids for the most part, but he also switches allegiances, especially near the end when he explains that he can't leave the factory to an adult because their minds are too stuck in place, it's got to be a kid, with a kid's imagination.
(no subject)
Wed, Jul. 20th, 2005 12:20 pm (UTC)The Dursleys I could take because they were so over the top and such caricatures that I didn't really feel much for them, but then Rowling starts moving away from such overt caricatures by including Snape. And I felt the point system and the Slytherins weren't caricatured enough, if that makes sense. And yeah, doesn't quite work so well with character development.