![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
reenkaI haven't been online like, at all, 'cause I'm totally engrossed in GRRM's Song of Ice and Fire series. And since the books are all 800+ pages and the last before this one was a thousand or so, I really don't have time for much of anything -but- reading these days, ahahah. I dunno if it's positive or negative that I'm on my last book-- on the one hand, I'll finally get to some comments & emails I've been lagging behind on (SORRY!!) but on the other hand I've grown seriously addicted to these books. Omg, there are no words. Seriously. Well, actually, there are a lot of words, but I'd rather read :>
My big Thought for the Day that I wanted to write down enough to actually get to a computer was this: one thing that's v. obvious in the books, one running theme, is outcasts. If someone is dispossessed, alienated or widely shunned, you can just tell that character will be sympathetic and basically won't be killed, even if they suffer a whole lot. On the other hand, if someone comes from comfort and is easily accepted and wins a lot of battles and loyalty easily, it will always be -too- easily, and their fall will come, no matter how delayed. They will get theirs.
This theme of 'Winter is Coming' is the House slogan of the main characters and also a main theme of the books, I think. The 'winners' don't always win by a long-shot, but the point is seemingly that their losing is really what strengthens them and prepares them to eventually win for good, on a larger scale. So while the Kings of Summer (literally, the House of lions) seem to hold the day-- the week-- the year-- what they really hold is the (only partly metaphorical) summer. And winter-- winter is coming, and only the alienated, the dispossessed, the fierce and immovable and most of all the stubborn (yet honorable!!) will survive the ultimate trial where it's not a 'game of thrones', no summer's play-- it's not a game, not win or lose, it's live or die, and to quote one of the (honorably dead) main characters, 'only the pack survives'-- or dies a noble death, it seems.
It's just really notable in hindsight: literally every likable character out of a cast of more than a dozen is lamed or seemingly 'weakened' somehow: mocked by their peers, looked down on, disregarded even if (and often when) they mock right back. Every likable character, whether or not they're (usually temporarily) powerful is an outcast and a misfit and often an honorable bastard, and every powerful, popular character is too blessed, too beautiful or rich or both. In fact, one of the main pretty/rich ones had to literally become maimed (and therefore outcast as a warrior) before they became written as truly sympathetic. One of 'the pack', even if he doesn't know it yet.
The (eventual) losers in these books are both the cowardly and dishonorable (liars, flatterers, those proud beyond their real worth who value themselves above all) and the overly self-assured in their valor and strength. They value strength without knowing weakness, without recognizing their own weakness, and that is why the reader knows they will fail.
What I was thinking (to finally get to it) of any interest to any of you is this: I think a reader's reaction to Harry will very often depend on whether they can see Harry as being truly dispossessed and alienated (and therefore 'deserving' of victory, as per GRRM's laws and actually JKR's as well-- it's just GRRM actually shows it more convincingly). It generally seems that people who root for the Slyths or at least are indifferent or actively against Harry basically can't see him as being alienated, an outsider, and instead see the -Slytherins- as being truly in the role of 'the outsiders', even if the authorial voice seems to utterly contradict this. (And small wonder Snape is seen at least somewhat sympathetically across the board, because whether one sees the Slyths or the Gryffs as 'the underdog', it's hard not to notice what a dispossessed, alienated bastard Severus Snape is: clearly he deserves some righteous victory... though in the Potterverse, who the hell knows if he'll get it or what it even is that he wants.)
Of course, this is a question of writerly quality, as to whether the writer is successful in portraying one group as being more 'worthy' or as 'the underdog' (which spells righteous victory, right). But the whole issue of reader's judgment nevertheless revolves around this central question, one way or the other, I think: is-- or is not-- Harry actually 'the Outsider', the 'stranger in a strange land', regardless of all his gifts & connections? Are Harry's support his pack (in GRRM's terms) or his legacy? That is the central question (which is much more clearly put in 'Song of Ice & Fire' than the HP books).
~~
Also, I realized (again), reading George RR Martin's Song of Ice & Fire series, that I -always- go for the bastardiest of the bastards. As soon as someone becomes more of a bastard, I like them more than the last bastard. I want to be cured!!! BUT HOW??!
On the bright side, I don't like stupid bastards. If they're stupid, delusional or really mad/insane, all bets are off. I've also found I don't really like womanizing bastards v. much. In a sort of 'well, that's nice but stay away from me' sort of way, but not a swoony way. I mean, I like bastards that are actually honorable and full of self-restraint in the flesh even if they're berserkers in a rage or can't control their mouth & mock everyone. But in terms of sex, if they're unrestrained in that arena for some reason I can't respect them quite the same way. It's odd, isn't it?
My big Thought for the Day that I wanted to write down enough to actually get to a computer was this: one thing that's v. obvious in the books, one running theme, is outcasts. If someone is dispossessed, alienated or widely shunned, you can just tell that character will be sympathetic and basically won't be killed, even if they suffer a whole lot. On the other hand, if someone comes from comfort and is easily accepted and wins a lot of battles and loyalty easily, it will always be -too- easily, and their fall will come, no matter how delayed. They will get theirs.
This theme of 'Winter is Coming' is the House slogan of the main characters and also a main theme of the books, I think. The 'winners' don't always win by a long-shot, but the point is seemingly that their losing is really what strengthens them and prepares them to eventually win for good, on a larger scale. So while the Kings of Summer (literally, the House of lions) seem to hold the day-- the week-- the year-- what they really hold is the (only partly metaphorical) summer. And winter-- winter is coming, and only the alienated, the dispossessed, the fierce and immovable and most of all the stubborn (yet honorable!!) will survive the ultimate trial where it's not a 'game of thrones', no summer's play-- it's not a game, not win or lose, it's live or die, and to quote one of the (honorably dead) main characters, 'only the pack survives'-- or dies a noble death, it seems.
It's just really notable in hindsight: literally every likable character out of a cast of more than a dozen is lamed or seemingly 'weakened' somehow: mocked by their peers, looked down on, disregarded even if (and often when) they mock right back. Every likable character, whether or not they're (usually temporarily) powerful is an outcast and a misfit and often an honorable bastard, and every powerful, popular character is too blessed, too beautiful or rich or both. In fact, one of the main pretty/rich ones had to literally become maimed (and therefore outcast as a warrior) before they became written as truly sympathetic. One of 'the pack', even if he doesn't know it yet.
The (eventual) losers in these books are both the cowardly and dishonorable (liars, flatterers, those proud beyond their real worth who value themselves above all) and the overly self-assured in their valor and strength. They value strength without knowing weakness, without recognizing their own weakness, and that is why the reader knows they will fail.
What I was thinking (to finally get to it) of any interest to any of you is this: I think a reader's reaction to Harry will very often depend on whether they can see Harry as being truly dispossessed and alienated (and therefore 'deserving' of victory, as per GRRM's laws and actually JKR's as well-- it's just GRRM actually shows it more convincingly). It generally seems that people who root for the Slyths or at least are indifferent or actively against Harry basically can't see him as being alienated, an outsider, and instead see the -Slytherins- as being truly in the role of 'the outsiders', even if the authorial voice seems to utterly contradict this. (And small wonder Snape is seen at least somewhat sympathetically across the board, because whether one sees the Slyths or the Gryffs as 'the underdog', it's hard not to notice what a dispossessed, alienated bastard Severus Snape is: clearly he deserves some righteous victory... though in the Potterverse, who the hell knows if he'll get it or what it even is that he wants.)
Of course, this is a question of writerly quality, as to whether the writer is successful in portraying one group as being more 'worthy' or as 'the underdog' (which spells righteous victory, right). But the whole issue of reader's judgment nevertheless revolves around this central question, one way or the other, I think: is-- or is not-- Harry actually 'the Outsider', the 'stranger in a strange land', regardless of all his gifts & connections? Are Harry's support his pack (in GRRM's terms) or his legacy? That is the central question (which is much more clearly put in 'Song of Ice & Fire' than the HP books).
~~
Also, I realized (again), reading George RR Martin's Song of Ice & Fire series, that I -always- go for the bastardiest of the bastards. As soon as someone becomes more of a bastard, I like them more than the last bastard. I want to be cured!!! BUT HOW??!
On the bright side, I don't like stupid bastards. If they're stupid, delusional or really mad/insane, all bets are off. I've also found I don't really like womanizing bastards v. much. In a sort of 'well, that's nice but stay away from me' sort of way, but not a swoony way. I mean, I like bastards that are actually honorable and full of self-restraint in the flesh even if they're berserkers in a rage or can't control their mouth & mock everyone. But in terms of sex, if they're unrestrained in that arena for some reason I can't respect them quite the same way. It's odd, isn't it?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-04-15 07:45 pm (UTC)I love it! And I think you're really on to something when you point out that he doesn't so much take things for granted as take them in stride. He's been abused and he's been favored. He's had to deal with the pluses and minuses of his celebrity, with being valued but not necessariy respected. He's had to reconcile the contradictions of being the center of attention but also an object casually manipulated by others. And he just works with it, works with whatever comes down. It's only in OOTP that he seems truly balked by this, that his self-possession seems to break down, and I'm still not totally sure what to make of that exception. The rest of the time, the flip side of his obliviousness is that he is very reality-oriented when it comes to things that do break into his awareness -- he just deals.
I think in a way your argument about Harry supplements and modifies your argument about outsiders. Because you talk about Ron and Draco, as "ordinary" people resenting the specialness of Harry and Hermione, and having to find their own center in an unfair world. And that's a good thing, that's a developmental challenge that Draco, at least, is equal to in HBP and benefits from, at least in the sense of becoming a stronger person. (He may still end up as Nagini-chow, of course, but he'll have had his moment of integrity!) But I think your point about Harry suggests that the fundamental issue is very similar for him, too. Only instead of having to find a sense of self-worth when other people are denying his worth, he has to find a source of authentic self-worth when other people are offering him all kinds of shoddy and distracting substitutes.
That's one reason I'm reluctant to privilege "outsider" status, as I said to Reena above. Outsiders may be good or bad, deserving or undeserving, for reasons entirely unrelated to their outsider status. I don't want to sentimentalize them.
I like the way you've expanded the argument to the Twins and the Weasleys. Again I find the idea of outsider!Weasleys just bizarre. Actually I think JKR is already coding the twins as successful thugs -- look at them hanging out in their flashy jackets at Dumbledore's funeral -- and of course they're war profiteers in HBP as well. The thing about the Weasleys as "outsiders" is that they're like a lot of, say, old-WASP families where a particular nuclear family may have fallen on hard times, opted out of the fast track, but if the kids really want to climb back up the pole, there are plenty of rich and connected uncles and aunts and cousins they can work with. The Weasley's pureblood status opens doors for them, I'm sure, across the WW. So, Bill has had no problem getting into "finance," (i.e. tomb-raiding), and Percy's career is taking off like a rocket, and Ron just needs to wake up and see that Molly and Arthur don't have to define his horizons. So yeah, the Weasleys are the last people I would consider outsiders. Even if I were willing to grant points to outsiders. :)
no subject
Date: 2006-04-15 11:16 pm (UTC)Yes--and I think we see that a lot just in the world. Everyone gets their victim act down, so you can even have people who are in charge of everything claiming that it's them that are being ostracized and kept down or treated unfairly. You've got some people who think it's great to present themselves as wholesome, all-American cheerleader who was in 4-H and the church group because that makes you part of the small "good" minority standing up against the godless weirdo liberal society. Meanwhile another person might now be a famous actor/model who always claims to have been one of the nerds and rejects because that's the outsider myth in their world.
Just last week in the Snarkery we had Molly hearing Slughorn's name and immediately telling Harry how he froze Arthur out, but that Arthur proved him wrong by being promoted while so many favorites of Slughorn's got jobs in the Ministry. This despite Arthur obviously being a favorite of Dumbledore's, a far more powerful man. Ron and Harry both have something invested in their outsider status when they meet. Ron presents himself as the perennial loser and Harry, fresh out of the cupboard, warms to him immediately. They're the losers--even while both of them know to steer clear of Neville and Hermione. Draco isn't only frozen out for insulting Ron, but for taking exactly the opposite tack and presenting himself as an "insider" when Harry and Ron have just bonded, subtly, over being outsiders. Once Draco's been rejected he himself adopts the rhetoric of the outsider (all the teachers have favorites, everyone thinks Potter's so special with his stupid scar...) even while the Slytherins also take the "there's no one besides us worth knowing" approach in HBP.
Which brings me sort of back to Harry again and the way that honestly the main thing that seems to draw people to him is his self-sufficiency. HBP was the first time Harry has ever been actively interested in another student's life--even with Cho and Ginny he's only interested in how they feel about him. In HBP he has to try to find out what's actually going on in Slytherin on their own terms. He's aware of himself as an outsider, of course, because he's not a Slytherin, but it's far less loaded. He's not seeing it in terms of Slytherins being allowed to get away with stuff or looking for ways this proves they're evil. Maybe that's another reason why Ron and Hermione don't follow into his investigations (besides plot reasons). Those two remain firmly fixed in Gryffindor just as they've been the past 6 years. (The DA used other students but there was no real desire to get to know and be friends with them.) Harry is perhaps the one to genuinely begin to look beyond house rivalries not for any conscious reason but because this is the way his real purpose pulls him. By this point he's the King of Gryffindor, dishy, tall, heroic, the Quidditch captain who draws first years and Hufflepuffs to his try-outs. He's taking special classes with Dumbledore. The new Potions teacher and Slug Club guy practically genuflects when he comes into class. There's all this intrigue going on in Gryffindor and he just doesn't care. He'd like Ginny for himself, but his focus is on Draco (who's involved in adult world intrigue) and his new, interesting and exciting friend, the Half-Blood Prince.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-16 02:18 am (UTC)I think it's true that Harry & Ron rejected Draco for being too obviously an 'insider', which is why I laugh scornfully at the people who say it could've been that Harry would have been friends with Draco if not for coincidental circumstances. I think no matter what, Draco would've pumped up his insiderness and Harry would've sneered at him. Harry really hates insiders whether or not it's reasonable or the outsiders are secretly insiders; he seems to just hate people who claim to be insiders and rub it in his face. Which just sort of makes me think that's his own insecurity and resentment talking. But even so, it's laughable to think he could've gotten over it way back then.
I really wonder about your (great!) point about Harry's 'real purpose', and wish you'd expand on that more, too :D Heh. I think maybe that's related, though: that Harry refuses to be a Gryffindor insider even if he is, because it bores him and just isn't what he wants as part of his identity. It's like, he 'looks beyond house rivalries' to validate his own self-image as 'apart', as needing to find his own purpose and his own niche and his own questions. Although really, he's just obsessed with all things Slytherin, it's just that simple; more than anyone else in Gryffindor (and they're really -all- obsessed) he can't let it go 'cause of his obvious multiple blood-ties and all that. And Draco... that's a personal thing, too.
But-- yes! He 'just doesn't care' about Gryffindor, the concerns of his supposed 'pack', and I wish people who went on about how Harry likes his priviledge or is consciously 'King' would realize this. He may be elected by others but has no desire to deal with those others, either as a leader or a manipulator or prince Draco-style. He just wants to do his own thing with his friends to back him up, but since he doesn't trust many people-- not even Ginny-- that basically amounts to Ron & Hermione. So all that stuff about him being on top is just somehow irrelevant from -Harry's- pov. And I can't decide just how important Harry's own pov is in understanding Harry, but I do know many people just disregard it when judging him harshly.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-16 04:17 am (UTC)Actually...I think it's almost the same issue. Because it's like people who want an outlet for their own victimized feelings maybe tend to make whatever character they like more victimized. Harry really isn't resentful in that way--I mean, he's resentful of some things, but not in quite this way. His "Poor Me" stuff in OotP comes out more like, FUCK OFF! Or as he says at one point, "Gee, having hard life. I wonder what that's like." It's not about being an outsider so much as having people fucking with him.
Which just sort of makes me think that's his own insecurity and resentment talking. But even so, it's laughable to think he could've gotten over it way back then.
Oh yeah--they're just total opposites that way. Harry needs to be one and Draco needs to be the other, even when they're switched. I mean, Harry will complain about the responsibilies or attention he gets and Draco will complain about Harry being the one to get those responsibilities and attention, but they'll still both want to see themselves as insider (Draco) and outsider (Harry) because that's what they think is the good thing to be. For Harry "insider" is the Dursleys and for Draco "outsider" is Mudbloods. Neither of them gets that it's all illusion.
So all that stuff about him being on top is just somehow irrelevant from -Harry's- pov.
Yes! Pre-OotP I always thought that was important in terms of trio-dynamics too because Ron's such a beta male and Harry freaked him out by not being an Alpha. I mean, he is one in individual situations, but he's not interested in dominating in general. When he leads it's because he has stuff he needs to get done, not because he needs to be the leader, exactly. Like, I suspect he's much more interested in making sure he's not dominating than dominating himself.
So yeah, it's like...in HBP especially the house issue is just irrelevent. He's maybe obsessed with Slytherin because even if he doesn't know it it's kind of his shadow and he's attracted to stuff that scares him about himself. He's not interested in uniting the houses really, like the Sorting Hat says and Hermione therefore wants to do in OotP. With the DA he just has this yen to teach Defense once it's brought up. In HBP he just knows where the action is, and it's not in Gryffindor, it's in Slytherin. Plus in that book it reminds me of the one time Draco and Harry are on the same page in PoA, when Draco's saying if it were his family Sirius had killed he'd want revenge. He just recognizes these are the people he clicks with this year, even if he hates both of them. And in the end the house just doesn't matter to him. Yeah, he hates Slytherins on principle, but he also still seems to know it's part of him. He's not trespassing there or anything. *Darth Vader voice* It is his destiny.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-16 08:50 pm (UTC)Sorry, that should read that Harry's much more interested in making sure he's not dominated not dominating.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-17 12:09 am (UTC)Hee! So much for top!Ron :D :D But yeah-- though I really wonder precisely what you mean (since I haven't thought enough about old Trio dynamics, I guess). Do you mean that if he was more assertive, Ron would feel more reassured of his place & wouldn't have had those jealous moments?? heh. But watching the GoF movie, I thought Ron's looking out for Harry even though they were fighting & Ron was all 'I don't need you!!' was so... genuinely submissive of him. And Harry didn't even register it, I don't think. ^^;
And, ahaha, yeah, it's totally the 'people he clicks with' thing-- though I imagine he wouldn't admit to that even under torture. He's just curious about 'dark' stuff & 'Slytherin' stuff in a way he -couldn't- be with Gryffindor 'cause it seems like Gryffindor has no mysteries or shady past or mysterious objects attached to it. I mean, the Sorting Hat and the sword? That's not that exciting. It really seems as if Slytherin's where it's at in general-- not sure if this is Harry's filter or the other Houses really are milque-toast. I imagine he just goes where the suspicious 'action' is, whereas the other students are happy 'just' being students. Harry was never really happy with doing homework and going to class if that's all that was going on :> It's a sort of self-fulfilling destiny :D
no subject
Date: 2006-04-17 12:41 am (UTC)would feel more reassured of his place & wouldn't have had those jealous
moments?? heh.
Yeah, sort of like that. Because Ron thinks Harry put his name in the Goblet without telling him so it's like...he's fine being his sidekick but Harry doesn't seem to understand that that means Ron's supposed to be in on this stuff. That's the perk, so everyone knows he and Harry are a team. And then they're fighting and Harry's just like, "Okay, fine. I'll just be all on my own!" And then he hits him below the belt with his wanting to have a scar. I feel like Ron's kind of thrown by that whole fight because it's not like he ever actually challenges Harry for being the leader--he's the freakin' boy who lived. But Harry doesn't give back the way a natural leader would--he's more of an Omega than an Alpha.
Like, since this was post-OotP I used to think look at the Slytherin group by contrast. Draco gives Orders and seems to give rewards as well. There's no inter-Trio dating, Draco just gets a girl who takes the position of the boss' girlfriend. Crabbe and Goyle pretty much know how to treat her with respect without it coming between the guys in any way. It's not the kind of friendship everyone would want but it's a very clear male hierarchy--even Harry gets that at the end of HBP.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-17 01:02 am (UTC)