![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaAt first, I just thought it was fun to mess with her, because she's just the most obvious candidate for extreme angst and homicidal urges I saw, next to Harry, what with CoS. She seemed to possess an idealistic, sensitive nature given to foolish fancies (which I know a little something about) and an almost certain passionate aspect (y'know, being a Weasley). She was introspective enough to -keep- a diary in the first place-- therefore she thought about things. She must have been rather traumatized, and the sheer potential for disillusionment with Harry (who didn't want her) was huge. Revenge was definitely a possibility, as I saw it.
So basically, what it comes down to is: it's not that I loved Ginny, but that (I thought I could) write Ginny. I'm really into lots of characters I can't seem to write (or consider hard to write). Ginny, on the other hand, is fun to write. She's soevil mischievous. And yeah, all right, I'll admit it: I like feisty girls... and I like shy girls... and I like that Ginny can be both. This is a question of personal preference, of course, so this whole ramble is not meant as a debate or a defense of canon!Ginny (i.e., an invitation for 'but no! Ginny sucks and here's why!') but more of an explanation, I guess, of what -I- see in her.
I think after one thinks (and writes about) a character enough, one 'possesses' some aspect of them in a way-- and is possessed. In this way, I'm talking about 'my' Ginny more than JKR's... because so much of this is interpretation and elaboration and possibly also wishful thinking and projection. As per usual.
Generally speaking, most people's fanon Ginny did nothing for me (except Aspen's), but that didn't matter 'cause I didn't -read- that many Ginnys anyway. One of the things I immediately felt was that she could be paired with a wide range of people, and she'd have significantly different brands of chemistry with them-- I mean-- Tom, Harry, Draco, Ron, Neville, Dean, Seamus, Random Hufflepuff/Slytherin/Gryffindor/Ravenclaw X, and that's not to mention Pansy (my personal favorite 'cause I saw her as Ginny's reflection), or say, Hermione & Luna if you must. You could write a -lot- of different kinds of stories with this character, because she has some rather contradictory aspects. She's got inner conflict, energy, impulsiveness and physical attractiveness-- and she seems to get along in different ways with different people. She's mutable and yet she's clearly got her own mind (which she keeps hidden-- though it wasn't much of a secret).
Ginny is prone to both action and reflection, and I always felt that she must have had a rich inner world and that her behavior was a reflection of various moods and forces working within her. OoTP!Ginny made sense to me, whether or not JKR's transition was well-done-- it doesn't make sense that Ginny Weasley doesn't know how to take care of herself, what with all those brothers. For me, she's easy to understand the same way Ron is-- because she just -feels- things and goes after them if it's up to her. If it's not up to her and she can't fight it, she waffles and turns angsty (rather like Ron turns angry). My theory is that the boys pursue -her-, not the other way around. She can probably field randy boys all right: it's actually having romantic initiative that would fluster her, 'cause she'd have to expose her emotions more sincerely.
I think brash, outgoing (sassy??) Ginny makes complete sense, 'cause it's a type of defense mechanism that sensitive girls have. One of my best friends in freshman year of college was just like her, actually-- she was really quiet and creative, but in groups, she was the bubbly flirty one. And yet she befriended me almost immediately (much like Ginny befriended Luna). It makes sense: I think Ginny sees her 'secret' self in Luna, who's no stranger to contradictions or chaos or believing in impossible things. Hermione & Ginny are actually more of opposites in that way. But... I think that Hermione & Ginny just 'hang out and talk' more and that Ginny makes Hermione more girly and possibly outgoing. This also fits with my experience... 'cause even though Ginny likes (and is possibly relaxed with) Luna, Hermione's actually in her social circle and thus they can share day-to-day gossip and stuff.
In a way, it seems like Ginny's relationships with girls are more important to her than those with boys-- who she seems to go through without much concern after her one big disillusionment. I mean, she doesn't seem to have boys who're just friends, though it's not that she's too shy or uncomfortable around them, clearly-- so it's likely enough that it's just that she relates differently with (is more genuinely interested in?) girls she's friends with.
I think a collection of quotes/facts from the books focusing solely on mentions of the girls should be made (because I'm lazy about rereading, of course). I think my idea of the Hermione/Ginny canon relationship is a bit fuzzy, and it's pretty important to really having a handle on either character.
Ginny just has a lot of energy-- and if she's not expelling it through some creative means, sports seems a natural direction. She probably doesn't -want- to have much time to think around OoTP. She's -too- busy, too loud, too active-- and that's as much of a defense as being withdrawn and distant and sarcastic.
When it comes down to it, Ginny is very much a -girl-, moreso than than any other female character in HP that we know much of anything about beyond a caricature (which sort of parallels how Ron is 'just' a boy). The others (Hermione, Pansy, Lavender, Luna, Parvati, etcetc) are much more specialized or trapped within their particular mold, it seems to me (though I think Pansy's also pretty normal). Ginny experiments, she plays around, she's loud and shy and flirty and earnest sometimes and kind sometimes and secretive sometimes. Some may say she's inconsistent-- and maybe so-- but I'd say she's realistic, to me :D Because, well-- I'm inconsistent too. Some things about me? You wouldn't believe were part of the same person, but they are. The most interesting characters to write about, for me, are ones I myself find contradictory and unpredictable.
People who seem to have problems with Ginny (or a lot of other characters) usually talk about canon: as in, 'this is my reaction to canon'. However, my reactions to secondary characters tend to either lean towards ignoring them or working through whatever it is in them that could speak to me directly, which can't help but bias me. So as I said: this is my interpretation of Ginny, and she's probably much more of a fleshed out -person- to me than she would be to someone who didn't write her. I think reading fics gives you a composite idea of fanon versions of characters, but often enough they're boring or offensive somehow, and unsympathetic in a way that's difficult to have written yourself.
I think... my Ginny, at heart, is looking for something (love, happiness, an adrenaline rush, understanding). She has a restless, somewhat wistful personality which gives her a sort of protective shell around her heart. She's generally forthright and open & honest with her emotions, and doesn't go in for deception or guile much-- however, there are definitely things she's uncomfortable showing. She has a quick temper and enjoys what she sees as 'healthy competition'-- a trait which is as likely to be nurture (considering her brothers) as nature. She's surprisingly sweet and thoughtful, but most people dismiss her intelligence if they don't really know her. She's easy to like and she likes most people, but if you piss her off or offend her friends, she will do her best to kick your ass the best way she knows how.
She likes being wanted and paid attention to, but she doesn't really have time for much overt pandering towards the boys (probably an area where she and Hermione can bond). However, it's entirely likely that she has a secret love of pink and possibly dresses (though that doesn't mean she'd wear them). She's adventurous, generally fun (and sometimes challenging) to be around and free-spirited, which means she's popular with the boys anyway. She flirts most of the time and puts out just enough to keep them interested, I imagine. She laughs a lot, but giggles even more.
Ginny can be given to fits of melancholy and brooding introspection, though she isn't very open with this with pretty much anyone, I think (except possibly Luna, but I don't think they're that close). She forces herself to suppress a lot of things and laughs her way through it in public. I think she's a rather different person alone than she is in company of any sort-- her mutability is both a curse and a necessity.
She probably is closer to her father than her mother, but this is a wild guess. Of her brothers, she's closest to Ron, though he really exasperates her. She has never entertained the idea that she wasn't as good as any of her brothers, really, unlike Ron. Basically, she's an extraverted intuitive type, which generally does tend to be the most popular type of person-- and also one of the most angst-ridden types if they turn introverted at times. I think she probably really does believe she's over Harry, but will always feel 'something' for him just because she did.
People underestimate her to their peril :D
So basically, what it comes down to is: it's not that I loved Ginny, but that (I thought I could) write Ginny. I'm really into lots of characters I can't seem to write (or consider hard to write). Ginny, on the other hand, is fun to write. She's so
I think after one thinks (and writes about) a character enough, one 'possesses' some aspect of them in a way-- and is possessed. In this way, I'm talking about 'my' Ginny more than JKR's... because so much of this is interpretation and elaboration and possibly also wishful thinking and projection. As per usual.
Generally speaking, most people's fanon Ginny did nothing for me (except Aspen's), but that didn't matter 'cause I didn't -read- that many Ginnys anyway. One of the things I immediately felt was that she could be paired with a wide range of people, and she'd have significantly different brands of chemistry with them-- I mean-- Tom, Harry, Draco, Ron, Neville, Dean, Seamus, Random Hufflepuff/Slytherin/Gryffindor/Ravenclaw X, and that's not to mention Pansy (my personal favorite 'cause I saw her as Ginny's reflection), or say, Hermione & Luna if you must. You could write a -lot- of different kinds of stories with this character, because she has some rather contradictory aspects. She's got inner conflict, energy, impulsiveness and physical attractiveness-- and she seems to get along in different ways with different people. She's mutable and yet she's clearly got her own mind (which she keeps hidden-- though it wasn't much of a secret).
Ginny is prone to both action and reflection, and I always felt that she must have had a rich inner world and that her behavior was a reflection of various moods and forces working within her. OoTP!Ginny made sense to me, whether or not JKR's transition was well-done-- it doesn't make sense that Ginny Weasley doesn't know how to take care of herself, what with all those brothers. For me, she's easy to understand the same way Ron is-- because she just -feels- things and goes after them if it's up to her. If it's not up to her and she can't fight it, she waffles and turns angsty (rather like Ron turns angry). My theory is that the boys pursue -her-, not the other way around. She can probably field randy boys all right: it's actually having romantic initiative that would fluster her, 'cause she'd have to expose her emotions more sincerely.
I think brash, outgoing (sassy??) Ginny makes complete sense, 'cause it's a type of defense mechanism that sensitive girls have. One of my best friends in freshman year of college was just like her, actually-- she was really quiet and creative, but in groups, she was the bubbly flirty one. And yet she befriended me almost immediately (much like Ginny befriended Luna). It makes sense: I think Ginny sees her 'secret' self in Luna, who's no stranger to contradictions or chaos or believing in impossible things. Hermione & Ginny are actually more of opposites in that way. But... I think that Hermione & Ginny just 'hang out and talk' more and that Ginny makes Hermione more girly and possibly outgoing. This also fits with my experience... 'cause even though Ginny likes (and is possibly relaxed with) Luna, Hermione's actually in her social circle and thus they can share day-to-day gossip and stuff.
In a way, it seems like Ginny's relationships with girls are more important to her than those with boys-- who she seems to go through without much concern after her one big disillusionment. I mean, she doesn't seem to have boys who're just friends, though it's not that she's too shy or uncomfortable around them, clearly-- so it's likely enough that it's just that she relates differently with (is more genuinely interested in?) girls she's friends with.
I think a collection of quotes/facts from the books focusing solely on mentions of the girls should be made (because I'm lazy about rereading, of course). I think my idea of the Hermione/Ginny canon relationship is a bit fuzzy, and it's pretty important to really having a handle on either character.
Ginny just has a lot of energy-- and if she's not expelling it through some creative means, sports seems a natural direction. She probably doesn't -want- to have much time to think around OoTP. She's -too- busy, too loud, too active-- and that's as much of a defense as being withdrawn and distant and sarcastic.
When it comes down to it, Ginny is very much a -girl-, moreso than than any other female character in HP that we know much of anything about beyond a caricature (which sort of parallels how Ron is 'just' a boy). The others (Hermione, Pansy, Lavender, Luna, Parvati, etcetc) are much more specialized or trapped within their particular mold, it seems to me (though I think Pansy's also pretty normal). Ginny experiments, she plays around, she's loud and shy and flirty and earnest sometimes and kind sometimes and secretive sometimes. Some may say she's inconsistent-- and maybe so-- but I'd say she's realistic, to me :D Because, well-- I'm inconsistent too. Some things about me? You wouldn't believe were part of the same person, but they are. The most interesting characters to write about, for me, are ones I myself find contradictory and unpredictable.
People who seem to have problems with Ginny (or a lot of other characters) usually talk about canon: as in, 'this is my reaction to canon'. However, my reactions to secondary characters tend to either lean towards ignoring them or working through whatever it is in them that could speak to me directly, which can't help but bias me. So as I said: this is my interpretation of Ginny, and she's probably much more of a fleshed out -person- to me than she would be to someone who didn't write her. I think reading fics gives you a composite idea of fanon versions of characters, but often enough they're boring or offensive somehow, and unsympathetic in a way that's difficult to have written yourself.
I think... my Ginny, at heart, is looking for something (love, happiness, an adrenaline rush, understanding). She has a restless, somewhat wistful personality which gives her a sort of protective shell around her heart. She's generally forthright and open & honest with her emotions, and doesn't go in for deception or guile much-- however, there are definitely things she's uncomfortable showing. She has a quick temper and enjoys what she sees as 'healthy competition'-- a trait which is as likely to be nurture (considering her brothers) as nature. She's surprisingly sweet and thoughtful, but most people dismiss her intelligence if they don't really know her. She's easy to like and she likes most people, but if you piss her off or offend her friends, she will do her best to kick your ass the best way she knows how.
She likes being wanted and paid attention to, but she doesn't really have time for much overt pandering towards the boys (probably an area where she and Hermione can bond). However, it's entirely likely that she has a secret love of pink and possibly dresses (though that doesn't mean she'd wear them). She's adventurous, generally fun (and sometimes challenging) to be around and free-spirited, which means she's popular with the boys anyway. She flirts most of the time and puts out just enough to keep them interested, I imagine. She laughs a lot, but giggles even more.
Ginny can be given to fits of melancholy and brooding introspection, though she isn't very open with this with pretty much anyone, I think (except possibly Luna, but I don't think they're that close). She forces herself to suppress a lot of things and laughs her way through it in public. I think she's a rather different person alone than she is in company of any sort-- her mutability is both a curse and a necessity.
She probably is closer to her father than her mother, but this is a wild guess. Of her brothers, she's closest to Ron, though he really exasperates her. She has never entertained the idea that she wasn't as good as any of her brothers, really, unlike Ron. Basically, she's an extraverted intuitive type, which generally does tend to be the most popular type of person-- and also one of the most angst-ridden types if they turn introverted at times. I think she probably really does believe she's over Harry, but will always feel 'something' for him just because she did.
People underestimate her to their peril :D
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 02:26 am (UTC)She probably is closer to her father than her mother, but this is a wild guess.
Well, we do know from GoF that Ginny thinks her mother old-fashioned, so it's probably not too wild a guess.
... just sorry
Date: 2004-07-23 02:33 am (UTC)I strongly disagree with this, post OotP. She's not shy. She's not introverted, or reflexive. She's sassy, gutsy, a tomboy. I was in love with her pre-OotP, I wrote her (http://www.livejournal.com/users/malafede/13119.html) more than once (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/705139/1/) (weee, you read that! <3333). Her present self bores me to death - I find her fake (her characterisation), stereotypical, and too easy. Like: For me, she's easy to understand the same way Ron is. Ugh, no no no no. Okay, I mean, for me she isn't. I don't feel there's anything to feel, just some literary formula. Ron is little, emotional, loyal, bitter, prejudiced... Ginny has none of that personality.
Ginny is very much a -girl-, moreso than than any other female character in HP that we know much of anything about beyond a caricature
What are you saying? Ginny's not girly at all. That's Pansy. And Parvati&Lavender (they're starting to become like Samneric in my mind). Or do you mean she's "just a girl" as in she's not engaged in epic, super-human quests that would shock her teen self into adulthood? Because then we get into the "personality" territory again, and she not having one to me, I can't really make assessments on her processes of growth. Parvati&Lavender seem much more typical girls to me.
People underestimate her to their peril
You mean people as characters of her universe (with which, knowing JKR, I agree) or readers? What are your Ginny's bad traits?
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 02:49 am (UTC)I see her as a 'typical girl' because she possesses different aspects of girlhood in some measure-- she's both tomboyish and not, in different ways. I consider Lavender & Parvati & Hermione and so on to be more specialized. I don't think classical femininity registers as 'girlhood' to me, but rather just a sense of a balance between masculinity and femininity. In this way, I compared her to Pansy-- who I said was her reflection for precisely this reason, though I wasn't saying they were similar personality-wise.
I mean, -my- Ginny has personality, and I spent this whole essay describing precisely because I didn't want to get into an argument about canon!Ginny's personality, since I don't think I'm suited to that sort of debate. I see her in a certain way, and I can describe what way that is, but I can't -prove- she's that way. Usually I can't prove any of my opinions/visions, you know. I mean, I can make a good go of it, but I'm not implying a rational interpretation of canon-- or anything-- anytime I say things. I am imagining rather than analysing. That is just a question of thinking process. I translate my intuitions into analysis to placate people who confront me with analysis, but that doesn't mean this is a -product- of analysis, see? This is a product of me identifying with Ginny, pure and simple.
I didn't say that Ron & Ginny's personalities were similar-- just that the mode of my understanding of them was similar because they're both emotionally-based personalities as I see them. Hermione doesn't come across that way to me, so I feel less comfortable analysing/writing about her. I do think Ron & Ginny have some things in common, and a lot of things they're different on.
Yeah, I meant characters of her universe :>
My Ginny's bad traits are the same as any other character's: basically, her positive traits twisted and intensified. So-- she can be broody, over-sensitive, aggressive, possibly patronizing/insensitive, overly concerned with others' attention and opinion, overly coy/avoidant, too impulsive, too given to daydreams, too incautious, and possibly her tendency to go through boyfriends implies she has intimacy problems which will bring her heartbreak and disappointment 'cause she expects too much from people and puts them on pedestals once she gets too involved.
She's also just -really- stubborn and I'm sure her temper could be something else :>
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 02:55 am (UTC)Re: ... just sorry
Date: 2004-07-23 07:42 am (UTC)That was my reaction too. I mean, pre-OotP I thought about Ginny much the way she's described above. If I look at those first four books I think this essay is very accurate. It was only in the fifth book when she changed and, I would say, stopped being just a girl that I began to despise her. But then, you know that.:-)
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 07:57 am (UTC)I commented upon the references you made from canon for just this reason.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 12:07 pm (UTC)Book 5 was so deeply traumatic for so many fans that a lot of enthusiasm just left the fandom (and sadly, some really terrific writers left the fandom) in its wake.
It is wonderful to click on a link and find deep and meaningful discussions of characters I love, especially Ginny who I like more and more since Book 5.
Thanks Renka!
man, you have superpowers...
Date: 2004-07-23 01:30 pm (UTC)And this is not suspicious in the slightest to you?
maybe just a little :D
Date: 2004-07-23 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 02:21 pm (UTC)And it makes me kinda sad that some people got turned off characters they loved post-OoTP-- like Harry & Ginny & Hermione mostly. Now I want to write about Hermione~:))
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 03:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 05:03 pm (UTC)I think the main clash would come from conclusions people had drawn from those clues rather than current actions which directly contradicted past actions-- and even then, actions can easily be contradictory from ages 11 to 14 :>
I suppose my take on it is that neither OoTP -or- CoS Ginny are 'the One True Ginny'-- I mean, in seeing them as aspects of her personality I'm able to settle on some third Ginny, who is a person beyond her actions... or maybe I just have a hard time judging people solely based on their actions (or attitudes in public). It seems like such a limited resource. But definitely, in OoTP she acquired more traits, which can't help but make her more of a person, unless you think some traits just can't coexist together or in certain quantities in the same person, maybe.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 06:01 pm (UTC)Like, what does one go by?
The person's actions? Statements? The things they -don't- do but could do? Things others say about them for whatever reason? Things you think are implied by their actions? Because the implications will always be ambiguous no matter what, I think, to some degree.
I guess I took my pre-OoTP interpretation of Ginny from my thoughts about 'her type' of girl-- y'know, the girl who wanted her prince and got the devil, the dreamy one with the fairy-tale castles and the monsters in the closet-- anyway, I took pieces of her from myself. Other people would scour the books for mentions of her 'real' personality or whatever, but I just took pieces of what she did and made a story about a girl in my head. And then with OoTP, I took more pieces and made a slightly different girl. I mean, I wrote femmeslash with her before OoTP (with Pansy, because she loved Draco and couldn't have him too)-- but it didn't really click, because that meta connection was all that I was basing it on.
I mean, it's a difference between interpreting/collecting facts like pieces of broken shell (and then a piece doesn't fit and it's all messed up because it's a dried coral instead of a shell) and kind of spinning from facts (randomness & chaos, yeay!...?), maybe? I'm not sure :>
I don't think it's possible to really disappoint me with a canon characterization, because it's automatically real to me. I kind of go, 'oh, I guess that's how it is'. Even with Draco, I mean to accept canon and build on it more than try to subvert it or question it on a factual level. Canon interpretation could be false, but canon characterization... I dunno, especially with a character who was barely -there- before, like Ginny. As long as the books remain consistent within themselves at least for the length of the volume, I'm okay.
I can see how this is a similar thing to people saying 'but canon!Draco is barely a caricature, how could you say fanon!Draco's OOC', but it's not the same-- Draco's had more actions, more constraints to his actions-- and he's also inconsistent in reaction and yet plays a consistent role. Ginny's ambiguous in a different way.
When I read OoTP (or the other books)... basically I didn't care about Ginny one way or the other-- and well, as usual I didn't care about anyone but Harry and whoever he cares about 'cause I'm a pov slave, clearly. Harry still didn't really -care- about Ginny, so it was like 'oh', and I filed new information away. My appreciation for Ginny is a writer's appreciation, and I feel like there's more to play with now, so I use facts without much judgement. I was just happy there was -more-. Like with any HP character I write... any info is info I can use :> Then again, my so-called love for canon is deceptive :>
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 06:20 pm (UTC)Like, with Ginny the whole thing is people always say we're just seeing a different side to her and she was nervous around Harry but to me all those things we saw did say something about her character that we're not even being told has changed--she was always this person and somehow came across as that other person. And they do seem like two fundamentally different people to me, even if they have some things in common. The core person, imo, is different. We did get glimpses of Ginny in her natural environment away from Harry in previous books and she presented something different from what she always did in OotP. When I think back on previous books now I have the same problem--why didn't we see a glimpse of this Ginny here? Or here? Or here? She was a very big presence in OotP who had the same personality in every scene--I find it hard to believe she could ever have kept up the behavior she did for four years, mostly for no reason.
Hmmm...I think this in general may be something that needs questioning, whether a canon character can be out of character. When Ginny was onstage in OotP it wasn't that she was written badly if she'd been a new character, but all I was aware of in her scenes was how much JKR was shoving this new person down my throat.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 08:31 pm (UTC)I think there's a difference between trying to resolve Ginny's character for oneself as a writer & as a reader, I suppose... that's why I was making all those references to 'my' Ginny. I mean... I admit there are inconsistencies, but to me they're just something to work with, and in the raw form, I just don't care enough about Ginny or whatever secondary character JKR messes with as a plot device. I still notice that it's like 'whuh--?' as I read it, but I don't feel shoved at 'cause there's little resistance or like, caring in me.
Perhaps this has to do with the reader being invested in picturing a character a certain way? Because I recognize the shift and yet I don't judge it as necessarily negative in an of itself. I realize that there are logic errors here, but there are logic errors in -so- many aspects of JKR's world that if I started to really question it at the basic level, a lot of it would fall apart. Suspension of disbelief is something I probably over-indulge in when I read original fic-- 'cause I definitely don't usually do it with fanfic, at least lately.
Hmm. This makes me curious whether your reading process of fanfic & canon is linked or similar in method/approach (moreso than mine)....
I think a canon character can be OOC, definitely, but it's more difficult to make a strong stance about a minor character that just became less minor, y'know? The question of whether JKR pulled off hinting at Ginny's 'true character' is different from the question of whether this is 'still Ginny' or whether Ginny could have different sides/aspects in different circumstances. Of course it's still Ginny-- it has to be. Even bad writing is 'the truth' as far as 'fictional reality' goes, because we have nothing else, right-- except for our own imaginations patching up the holes bad writing leaves behind.
So it comes down to both writing quality issues and suspension of disbelief issues more than a basic characterization profile one has as a reader, which is sort of a meta distillation of the text anyway.
Weren't you saying she was outgoing before OoTP? So there must've been clues I didn't really pay attention to as a reader. But I did notice in OoTP.
The fact that Ginny is still Ginny-- saying this is not true is only viable as a meta-critical judgement of the text or a sort of... rejection of it. You cannot sort of... insert it into the text as parrt of it. It is outside it... so it's hard to use the text to write/understand Ginny and yet still go with that theory. Because if OoTP Ginny is not Ginny then... where was she? Y'know? My head sort of hurts, thinking about it.
So I'm just saying that I keep canon-criticism separate from canon-interpretation which is what I use to build from in terms of writing with it as a base. It is a wobbly, inconsistent base-- in many respects-- but in a way, that just makes it interesting/challenging for me as a fanfic writer :>
no subject
Date: 2004-07-23 08:58 pm (UTC)Of course it's still Ginny-- it has to be. Even bad writing is 'the truth' as far as 'fictional reality' goes, because we have nothing else, right-- except for our own imaginations patching up the holes bad writing leaves behind.
That's the question I really ask myself about and I'm not sure what my feeling on it is! And it's weird because I've never been invested in Ginny, I don't care about her as a character. Maybe if she'd become a character I didn't hate I wouldn't even care now!
no subject
Date: 2004-07-24 10:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-08-01 09:41 am (UTC)*enjoys your essay thoroughly*
I love character analyses like this. :D (I really need to write one on Fandom!Draco...)
I like feisty girls... and I like shy girls... and I like that Ginny can be both.
- TOTALLY agree with you there.
Hermione & Luna
- I think I considered that while reading OotP, and then promptly forgot about the possibility. It's intriguing and their differences are fascinating, but I really think that Hermione would damage Luna's dreamlike reality too much, and that Mione would have to really struggle with being patient with Luna. (Ofcoursethisismypersonaltake... ;D)
OoTP!Ginny made sense to me, whether or not JKR's transition was well-done-- it doesn't make sense that Ginny Weasley doesn't know how to take care of herself, what with all those brothers.
- I agree. I personally really dislike Ginny being portrayed as sweet and delicate and needing everyone to look out for her because it's how she's been raised. Especially with the KIND of brothers she has, she always struck me as someone who'd make more sense having a spine and knowing how to look out for herself. After all, she'd have to have developed personal foundation just living with the twins (whom of course I LOVE to death, but it's infamous that they're a handful), but also precocious Percy, and bigtoughstrongcool Bill&Charlie, and Ron straggling behind the other boys? It only seems natural for her to be a bit of a tomboy.
My theory is that the boys pursue -her-, not the other way around. She can probably field randy boys all right: it's actually having romantic initiative that would fluster her, 'cause she'd have to expose her emotions more sincerely.
- That's really interesting. I agree that boys probably chase her, but I don't think romance would be so flustering to her. I think she could handle that enough. With the fifth book, I actually really liked her characterization; to be honest, shy little Ginny annoyed all hell out of me. But her being able to be with a boy for an extended period of time, then move on to another without Cho-esque flailing really demonstrates (to me) that she's developed as excellent of an emotional balance as ANY teenaged girl can have.
I think that Hermione & Ginny just 'hang out and talk' more and that Ginny makes Hermione more girly and possibly outgoing.
- Mm, agreed. Just as Hermione can act like a mother/sister/friend to Harry, she's like the older sibling, the female influence (aside from maternal, of course) that Ginny's grown up without.
She's -too- busy, too loud, too active-- and that's as much of a defense as being withdrawn and distant and sarcastic.
- *mumblemumble* Or being accusatory, angry, abrasive, self-pitying like *coughHarrycough*? >_> I'm SO happy Ginny grew out of her OMGHARRYAHHH phase.
though I think Pansy's also pretty normal
- Mm, I disagree there. I didn't pay much attention to her pre-OotP just because my automatic possessiveness towards Draco in slash pairings gave me an immediate aversion to the girl; aside from that, I was indifferent to her. But in OotP, her obnoxious laugh and too-frequent presence around Draco consistently gave me the mental image of a wild boar. It was amusing, no doubt, but I didn't want to think of Pansy in such a narrow light; still, JKR is known for leaving side characters, especially Slytherins, rather undeveloped and two-dimensional.
no subject
Date: 2004-08-01 09:41 am (UTC)However, my reactions to secondary characters tend to either lean towards ignoring them or working through whatever it is in them that could speak to me directly, which can't help but bias me.
- As the vast majority of people fall into the former category, I love introspective essays from people in the latter. =P I'm much the same way, seesawing between whether I simply don't care, or become far more intimate with a side character.
She's generally forthright and open & honest with her emotions, and doesn't go in for deception or guile much-- however, there are definitely things she's uncomfortable showing.
She's easy to like and she likes most people, but if you piss her off or offend her friends, she will do her best to kick your ass the best way she knows how.
- Good perception. That's more how I pictured her being while working through OotP.
except possibly Luna, but I don't think they're that close
Simply with Luna's personality, mindset and upraising, I think it would be difficult for anybody to get close to her-- but at the same time, Ginny's probably one of the only ones who would try. Personal opinion, but I think Ginny could really understand her more than the other stock characters-- she'd be used to feeling different, isolated (growing up with boys, the CoS incident, etc).
Basically, she's an extraverted intuitive type, which generally does tend to be the most popular type of person-- and also one of the most angst-ridden types if they turn introverted at times.
- Nice psychological aspect, and statistically quite true.
I think she probably really does believe she's over Harry, but will always feel 'something' for him just because she did.
- Ah, yes; the infamous First Love Syndrome.
no subject
Date: 2004-08-01 03:40 pm (UTC)I remember writing Pansy with Draco for the first time, and back then I couldn't write Draco in lust/love with anyone but Harry, so really he was using Pansy as a mouth to fuck, but. I didn't have a good idea of her characterization then. And then I wrote `Breeding'... and the thing I realized is that if you really try and put things together-- that she wears pink dresses and attaches herself to Draco (the popular-yet-dorky one) and taunts and bullies right along with him... that's a certain type of girl. It's a pretty -normal- type of girl. She's just one of those mean, think-they're-so-pretty insecure popular girls.
I agree that she's underdeveloped of course, but it's hard for me to totally separate my Pansy and canon!Pansy at this point. Alas -.-
no subject
Date: 2004-08-03 12:37 am (UTC)wow. at last...
Date: 2004-08-20 02:15 am (UTC)that is a really, good, well-structured, interesting and in-depth analysis of Ginny you've done there. i wish i could write essays like so (and now i am determined to go off and try).
most of the other stuff which i've read that has been written about Ginny has disappointed me, mainly because people fail to take into account the facets of her personality which are shown in CoS. mostly, they complain about how ginny's changed personality has been stuffed down their throats in OoTP. whilst i can sympathise with this slightly, because i think JK did rush the change a bit, i personally LIKE the character of Ginny in OoTP, as i think her personality in the fifth book is much more realistic and like that of a girl who has grown up without many female influences (and with a fairly strong male influence, especially from, say, the twins).
in the same way, i don't think that Ginny is necessarily OOC in CoS, in which she is not an extrovert, or (seemingly) very tomboyish. her introvertive (is that a word? oh dear...) behaviour can be explained, i believe, by two things:
1. The series is from Harry's point of view, and we know that Ginny has a huge crush on Harry. which of us here didn't tend to be unable to act like themselves when around the objects of our crush when we were 11? plus, he's the Boy Who Lived. He's a huge celebrity, and she knows that she doesn't really have a chance with him. these two facts lead to
2. Ginny's discovery of the diary, in which she writes about all her problems and worries (mostly harry-related), which leads to Tom controlling her, which leads to the chamber of secrets opening and people dropping off like flies all around the place. She's having these major spells of not being able to remember where she was, or what she was doing, and she's being controlled by Voldemort, of course. This would, you might think, lead to a slight change in personality.
i think that JKR's mistake came in dropping Ginny's personality on us in OoTP, without really giving prior warning in PoA or GoF. realistically, Ginny would have changed a bit, just as any character grows and matures over a series. and for most people, the amount we change between the age of 11 and the age of 14 is quite huge (teenagerhood and all that:D). We should have expected Ginny to have changed, but probably not as quickly as she did.
i think that your summing up of her as "the extroverted intuitive type, which generally does tend to be the most popular type of person-- and also one of the most angst-ridden types if they turn introverted at times" is one of the most accurate descriptions of Ginny i've ever heard.
okay, i've gone on for too long now, and probably not said what i meant very well *is embarrassed*. just my opinions.
amber x
Re: wow. at last...
Date: 2004-08-20 02:38 am (UTC)It's sad to me to see -any- character bashed on the basis of being 'not good enough' or 'not interesting'-- especially Ginny, who has so much potential. But then, I'm thinking more as a writer than a reader, there :>
~reena
i see what you mean
Date: 2004-08-20 02:48 am (UTC)amber x
slightly unrelated, but...
Date: 2004-08-20 02:55 am (UTC)amber x
no subject
Date: 2004-08-20 02:57 am (UTC)And a lot of people are in fact in fandom for the fanon rather than canon-- they're almost separate enough for that to work, too. If you don't like canon!Draco, for instance, you never have to see him written in-character in most fanfic unless you search really hard, for instance :D
Re: slightly unrelated, but...
Date: 2004-08-20 03:01 am (UTC)very reassuring :)
Date: 2004-08-20 03:02 am (UTC)amber x
p.s. can i add you to my friends as i am sad, forlorn and distinctly lacking in those, and your journal is interesting, as are you. please?
argh typos (ignore the brain behind the curtain)
Date: 2004-08-20 03:10 am (UTC)But yeah :D You don't generally have to ask to friend ljs unless they're a) friends only (i.e., locked) or b) um... there is no b :D So yeah, sure :D
Re: slightly unrelated, but...
Date: 2004-08-20 03:10 am (UTC)amber x
Re: argh typos (ignore the brain behind the curtain)
Date: 2004-08-20 03:16 am (UTC)nah, i like draco written any way, as long as it is convincingly done, which i think is the big failing, and why people tend to begin loathing niceDraco fics. but i'm fairly open-minded as far as fics are concerned, so long as people DON'T try and get me to believe that they're in line with canon when they're really not. i agree that draco isn't really evil, so much as a nasty, little schoolboy with attention-seeking problems :P
amber x