![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
donnaimmaculataLast week, it took my fancy to read Lucy Maud Montgomery's "Emily" series. I've never really been into the series as a child and have never owned and read the first book, so I hunted it down on the Internet. And then I met Dean Priest.
She heard him say, "My God!" softly to himself. [...] "How can I help you?" said Dean Priest hoarsely, as if to himself. "I cannot reach you--and it looks as if the slightest touch or jar would send that broken earth over the brink. I must go for a rope-- and to leave you here alone--like this. Can you wait, child?"
And then:
Emily knew he had been to college, that he was thirty-six years old--which to Emily seemed a venerable age--and well-off; that he had a malformed shoulder and limped slightly; that he cared for nothing save books nor ever had; that he lived with an older brother and travelled a great deal; and that the whole Priest clan stood somewhat in awe of his ironic tongue. Aunt Nancy had called him a "cynic." Emily did not know what a cynic was but it sounded interesting. She looked him over carefully and saw that he had delicate, pale features and tawny-brown hair. His lips were thin and sensitive, with a whimsical curve. She liked his mouth. Had she been older she would have known why--because it connoted strength and tenderness and humour.
Here, I had to stop reading and drink some cold water. Now, apart from the fact that I've got this insane thin-lips fetish (I'm probably the only person in the fandom who gets actually turned on by Snape's thin lips - instead of ignoring them bravely or explaining them away as being rather pouty, really, once one gets a better look at them. I rather ignore fandom!Sirius' lips being described as "full" and "girly" and - ew! - pink and - ewww! - fleshy.) - who could resist the connotation of "strength and tenderness and humour"?
But within a few paragraphs only, I fell out of love as quickly as I had fallen in. There are some things I do find disturbing, especially when they are voiced in passing and matter-of-factly. Then again, that's probably just me.
So, Dean Priest is doing very well, being equipped with attributes such as an "aloof dignity", "dreamy green eyes" and a "beautiful, musical and caressing voice". However, at the end of his conversation with 12-years-old Emily, he decides he's going to marry her in future. "I think I'll wait for you." At this point, Dean Priest dropped in my esteem from the top of the list of literary crushes right into nothingness.
I have this very deeply rooted aversion against grown men falling in love with girls who could be their daughters. While I don't think that Dean Priest is a pedophile (or, for that matter, Jane Austen's Col. Brandon or Mr. Knightley, who both fall in love with underage girls) and that his relationship to Emily is abusive, I do wonder what sort of man looks for a partner for life among little girls. It is not so much the relationship between the two characters I find disturbing but more the man himself. Because what makes me like a literary character is the fact that I can relate to them as I could relate to a real person. (This is why I like Rowling's novels so much: the characters feel real to me.) So while I feel about characters in novels just like I feel about people in RL, I apply the same criteria to them. If one of my friends, in his 20s or 30s, fell for a 12-years-old girl (like Emily, or Emma, who is 12 when 28-years-old Mr. Knightley falls in love with her) or with a 16-years-old girl, or even with a slightly older girl who's still at school and lives with her parents and leads a life so completely different from the lives my peer group leads, I would at least shake my head, be certainly disturbed and possibly alarmed.
So while I read and enjoyed Lolita (and fully understood what Humbert Humbert found so attractive about the girl), I find scenarios such as the one with Dean Priest or Col. Brandon's and Marianne's "romance" more disturbing. Because they are told in a way that indicates that it's perfectly normal to think of a schoolgirl as of one's future wife.
It is not so much the age difference that bugs me. (Two of my best friends are involved with/married to men twice their age.) It's more the difference in life styles and maturity levels. While I believe it's perfectly reasonable for a 50-years-old man to seriously fall in love with a woman in her late 20s, I don't think that a man in his late 30s should think of a 12-year-old as a potential partner for life. Again, if a friend of mine did, I would wonder whether he's not up to handling a woman his age, who is is equal in experience and maturity. And while I wouldn't necessarily think him a pervert (I can fully see the sexual appeal of young girls), I would think him weak. A grown man should know better than seduce underage girls just because he can and because they're willing (or unresisting). I don't underestimate schoolgirls; I was pretty calculating myself and got involved with far older men. But even then, I knew the relationships were not balanced and that I couldn't respect the men. I feel that if a man can't find his match among his equals, there is something seriously wrong with him.
This is incidentally the reason why I am not interested in Snarry fics. Not because I think it's necessarily an abusive relationship or because I think Snape is just blatantly forcing Harry - and the dynamics between them, all the hatred and aggression, is an aspect that strongly appeals to me - but because I lose a great part of my respect for Severus when he starts making out with Harry instead of focusing his energy on his equals. (What's wrong with Remus, eh?) Especially since Severus has experienced Harry as his student: there is a huge authority gap between them. Even if Snape is not actively abusive, he is the one with experience and in control - or should be. No matter how I look at this, whether Snape is actively in charge (thus abusing his position and manipulating Harry into a relationship), whether Snape merely follows his baser instincts (thus dehumanising himself) or whether Snape is seduced by Harry (thus giving up his control and giving himself over into Harry's hands), I lose a good part of my respect for the man.
This is merely an illustration of how my mind works and on why I am a dedicated supporter of relationships among equals. As to Snape/Black, while I can see them post Azkaban, I don't see them ending up together at school. In the narrative presence (well, before Sirius' death), they are both similarly fucked up, are both living under conditions they hate and haven't much control about their lives. They are equal in experience and situation (with regard to quantity, not quality).
But this is not supposed to be another pro-Snack essay. I originally intended to talk more about men's lips. Oh well. Maybe next time.
I need my bed now.
She heard him say, "My God!" softly to himself. [...] "How can I help you?" said Dean Priest hoarsely, as if to himself. "I cannot reach you--and it looks as if the slightest touch or jar would send that broken earth over the brink. I must go for a rope-- and to leave you here alone--like this. Can you wait, child?"
And then:
Emily knew he had been to college, that he was thirty-six years old--which to Emily seemed a venerable age--and well-off; that he had a malformed shoulder and limped slightly; that he cared for nothing save books nor ever had; that he lived with an older brother and travelled a great deal; and that the whole Priest clan stood somewhat in awe of his ironic tongue. Aunt Nancy had called him a "cynic." Emily did not know what a cynic was but it sounded interesting. She looked him over carefully and saw that he had delicate, pale features and tawny-brown hair. His lips were thin and sensitive, with a whimsical curve. She liked his mouth. Had she been older she would have known why--because it connoted strength and tenderness and humour.
Here, I had to stop reading and drink some cold water. Now, apart from the fact that I've got this insane thin-lips fetish (I'm probably the only person in the fandom who gets actually turned on by Snape's thin lips - instead of ignoring them bravely or explaining them away as being rather pouty, really, once one gets a better look at them. I rather ignore fandom!Sirius' lips being described as "full" and "girly" and - ew! - pink and - ewww! - fleshy.) - who could resist the connotation of "strength and tenderness and humour"?
But within a few paragraphs only, I fell out of love as quickly as I had fallen in. There are some things I do find disturbing, especially when they are voiced in passing and matter-of-factly. Then again, that's probably just me.
So, Dean Priest is doing very well, being equipped with attributes such as an "aloof dignity", "dreamy green eyes" and a "beautiful, musical and caressing voice". However, at the end of his conversation with 12-years-old Emily, he decides he's going to marry her in future. "I think I'll wait for you." At this point, Dean Priest dropped in my esteem from the top of the list of literary crushes right into nothingness.
I have this very deeply rooted aversion against grown men falling in love with girls who could be their daughters. While I don't think that Dean Priest is a pedophile (or, for that matter, Jane Austen's Col. Brandon or Mr. Knightley, who both fall in love with underage girls) and that his relationship to Emily is abusive, I do wonder what sort of man looks for a partner for life among little girls. It is not so much the relationship between the two characters I find disturbing but more the man himself. Because what makes me like a literary character is the fact that I can relate to them as I could relate to a real person. (This is why I like Rowling's novels so much: the characters feel real to me.) So while I feel about characters in novels just like I feel about people in RL, I apply the same criteria to them. If one of my friends, in his 20s or 30s, fell for a 12-years-old girl (like Emily, or Emma, who is 12 when 28-years-old Mr. Knightley falls in love with her) or with a 16-years-old girl, or even with a slightly older girl who's still at school and lives with her parents and leads a life so completely different from the lives my peer group leads, I would at least shake my head, be certainly disturbed and possibly alarmed.
So while I read and enjoyed Lolita (and fully understood what Humbert Humbert found so attractive about the girl), I find scenarios such as the one with Dean Priest or Col. Brandon's and Marianne's "romance" more disturbing. Because they are told in a way that indicates that it's perfectly normal to think of a schoolgirl as of one's future wife.
It is not so much the age difference that bugs me. (Two of my best friends are involved with/married to men twice their age.) It's more the difference in life styles and maturity levels. While I believe it's perfectly reasonable for a 50-years-old man to seriously fall in love with a woman in her late 20s, I don't think that a man in his late 30s should think of a 12-year-old as a potential partner for life. Again, if a friend of mine did, I would wonder whether he's not up to handling a woman his age, who is is equal in experience and maturity. And while I wouldn't necessarily think him a pervert (I can fully see the sexual appeal of young girls), I would think him weak. A grown man should know better than seduce underage girls just because he can and because they're willing (or unresisting). I don't underestimate schoolgirls; I was pretty calculating myself and got involved with far older men. But even then, I knew the relationships were not balanced and that I couldn't respect the men. I feel that if a man can't find his match among his equals, there is something seriously wrong with him.
This is incidentally the reason why I am not interested in Snarry fics. Not because I think it's necessarily an abusive relationship or because I think Snape is just blatantly forcing Harry - and the dynamics between them, all the hatred and aggression, is an aspect that strongly appeals to me - but because I lose a great part of my respect for Severus when he starts making out with Harry instead of focusing his energy on his equals. (What's wrong with Remus, eh?) Especially since Severus has experienced Harry as his student: there is a huge authority gap between them. Even if Snape is not actively abusive, he is the one with experience and in control - or should be. No matter how I look at this, whether Snape is actively in charge (thus abusing his position and manipulating Harry into a relationship), whether Snape merely follows his baser instincts (thus dehumanising himself) or whether Snape is seduced by Harry (thus giving up his control and giving himself over into Harry's hands), I lose a good part of my respect for the man.
This is merely an illustration of how my mind works and on why I am a dedicated supporter of relationships among equals. As to Snape/Black, while I can see them post Azkaban, I don't see them ending up together at school. In the narrative presence (well, before Sirius' death), they are both similarly fucked up, are both living under conditions they hate and haven't much control about their lives. They are equal in experience and situation (with regard to quantity, not quality).
But this is not supposed to be another pro-Snack essay. I originally intended to talk more about men's lips. Oh well. Maybe next time.
I need my bed now.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-03-11 08:34 am (UTC)Besides that kindred spirit stuff over things like cloud-watching and poetry, it was the fact that Emily immediately accepted him
I can't say I found Dean exactly creepy - not until he started being blatantly territorial and obsessive and jealous - because his relationship to Emily was never sexual when she was a young girl. But I don't understand the concept of devoting one's entire life to waiting for someone. Dean, a grown-up man with a considerable life experience, dedicates himself to waiting for a girl whose father he used to be friends with at college. This is something I find very off-putting. It is therefore not so much the concept of being attracted to a minor (something I can understand) but the fact that his life's pursuits are now revolving around this little girl.
Actually, this is a major aspect of my aversion against the adult/minor relationships that I completely forgot to mention in my post. (It was late last night when I wrote it.) When an adult falls in love with an underage girl and decides to not ignore this as a temporary infatuation, he can either act on his feelings and try to seduce her, or wait until she is of age and seduce her then. The first alternative has definitely an abusive connotation. Although I, of all people, am more than ready to admit that young girls are manipulative and calculating in their own rights. But, even thought they might want it, they are not fully aware of what exactly it is they want. I am not objecting against the relationship from the girl's point of view, though. If she thinks that's what she wants - let her go for it. How else can she gain experience?
Now, as to the waiting for someone: I don't like the idea of dedicating my life to the pursuit of one other person, and I definitely don't like the idea of someone else waiting for many years for me to be finally his. If some former teacher (or even a former school mate) of mine approached me with the words that he fell for me 15 years ago and has been biding his time all these years, I would be seriously freaked out and consider him an obsessive pervert.
This is, incidentally, the reason why I don't like Sirius/Remus reunion fics that much. I don't like the idea that someone (Remus) spent 15 years of their life waiting for their love to come back. I know that this is considered as tragically romantic by many, but I find it disturbing.
But I digress.
I'm fascinated by the (non-pedophilic) twistedness of character that compels "damaged" men to be drawn to younger would-be partners
I do think such a character is fascinating, but it's not a good sort of fascination. I am certainly fascinated by the character of Humbert Humbert in Lolita. He is actually a good example, because he illustrates exactly what I mean: Humbert doesn't force Lolita into the relationship. He manipulates her into it, but she is quite the manipulator herself, so there is a balance of sorts. I fully understand his desire for her, too, and I certainly understand her desire for a grown-up, experienced man who can show her the world, life and love. And from the young girl's point of view, I can approve of it. I wouldn't talk out a 17-years-old girl from hitting on a 30-years-old guy, but I would vice versa. Because I find is degrading for the man to go after a girl who's not his equal, but I do find it upgrading for the girl to pursuit a man who's her superior.
plus a big ol' student/ teacher kink.
See? I don't have a student/teacher kink. I've never even had a crush on a teacher. That's scarred me for life *g* I've always been very aware of certain social boundaries, especially those within hierarchical structures. It is not a moral thing, I don't think. I am open for all sorts of kinky relationships among consenting adults with similar levels of experience and maturity. I would shag my flat mate, my best friend's boyfriend and my brother's girlfriend, but I wouldn't shag my professor, my boss or my Dad's best friend. Weird, eh?
I'll probably do an about-face when my own daughter hits puberty in a few years.
Yeah, that's likely to change your point of view all right! *g*