![[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}
because i'm spamming your inbox today...
Date: 2004-03-13 01:27 pm (UTC)In, for example, England's Regency period, men and women could barely come into contact with each other in such a way to create a meaningful relationship before marriage. thus, love at first sight or only after a couple of chaperoned conversations would have been the norm. moreover, the simple amount of eligible ladies and gentlemen would have been severely limited for a particular age group, even considering the age differences within couples. so if an inteligent man met a charming girl whom he might reasonably expect to grow into a charming young lady and suitable wife, it would make a lot of sense to stake his claim early. it doesn't have to mean that he's erotically obsessed by her.. or even if he is erotically obsessed by her, it's not like he can get to know her to dispell the fantasy, or would want to. and the spheres of the sexes were so disparate anyway, age wouldn't have made much difference. the ideal woman of any age was seen as childlike, and they had the skull-measurements to prove it. ~_~
all of a sudden i've found myself much more sympathetic to all those ridiculous lovers who lost their hearts without a single word spoken, relationships based on poetry..... XP
Re: because i'm spamming your inbox today...
Date: 2004-03-14 05:46 am (UTC)Intelectually, I do understand that much of what I am put off by can be explained by the historical context. But my aversion is a rather instinctive one anyway.
As to the Emily series, they're set in the 1920s, and the girl is pretty independend and hangs around with boys a lot. The man turns out truly creepy after a while, getting all possessive and jealous and whatnot. And such things really freak me out.
the ideal woman of any age was seen as childlike, and they had the skull-measurements to prove it. ~_~
Ah yes. And psychological maturity was not to be expected since women had no soul anyway.
Re: because i'm spamming your inbox today...
Date: 2004-03-14 06:11 am (UTC)I do know exactly what you mean about instinctive aversion to dependenct and/or manipulative relationships. The Snape/Harry relationship in my head doesn't fall under those terms, but it sounds like the exact reason the mere contemplation of Snape/Dumbledore, for example, makes me want to throw up. I can't imagine a scenario in which they can approach each other as equals - Snape will always owe something, in one or both of their minds. It's also the reason Tom/Dumbledore can be such an interesting pairing, as the manipulation comes from both sides, there are moral ambiguities both ways... And Snape/Black, sadly, I can't imagine while....
[it sounds like someone's being possessed by the devil outside my door; sometimes i hate living in university housing...]
sorry. Snape/Black. yes, as I've mentioned, it just doesn't work for me without some sort of severe mental trauma on Snape's part... And I just don't want to read that! ;_; Moreover, if the trauma weren't there, I probably wouldn't find the story believable.
...Come to think of it, the Snape/Black dynamic I envision is similar to my major objection to Harry/Draco. I don't want Draco obsessed with Harry to the degree that he has to fuck him, in hatred or love or... anything. I want Draco to be able to escape his various roles as Malfoy heir, junior Death Eater, Potter nemesis... The greatest breakthrough for him, I think, would be leaving it all behind. The greatest freedom would be to simply not give a damn. The world does not revolve around Harry Potter.
Re: because i'm spamming your inbox today...
Date: 2004-03-14 07:05 am (UTC)And as
Snape/Black. yes, as I've mentioned, it just doesn't work for me without some sort of severe mental trauma on Snape's part...
Yes, that's why for me, Snape/Black works only when set in the narrative presence, when Sirius is just as vulnerable and messed up and traumatised as Severus and when Severus is in a stronger position than Sirius - by being free to come and go as he pleases, for example. I don't like seeing my men abusing each other, seeing as life's abused them more than enough!
I don't want Draco obsessed with Harry to the degree that he has to fuck him, in hatred or love or... anything.
Oh no, I hate Draco obesessing about Harry. But I'm not much into the obsessing-over-somebody scenarios in general. In fact, I hate 'em. This brings me nicely to my original topic: the fact that older men fall so deeply for young girls that they have their lives revolve around the girls scares me. But it would scare me also if both partners were the same age, only a grown woman is capable to reflect about the whole affair and escape it if necessary.
But I've got a very disturbed view on where obsession begins. In RL, I am highly irritated when someone has their life centre around one other person, and if this person in the centre happend to be me - well, I'm so out of there. (Regardless whether it's a positive or negative obsession, i.e. love or hate.)
I've never liked Draco, not because he is Evil (haha!), but because he is unable to leave Harry alone. What I associate with Draco is his tugging along after Harry to catch his attention with silly little tauntings (if Harry was a girl, he'd be pulling her pigtails) and whining he'd "tell Father". That's just so... pitiful. I could like Draco as a character, though, if Rowling gave him some more depth. *sighs*
The greatest breakthrough for him, I think, would be leaving it all behind. The greatest freedom would be to simply not give a damn. The world does not revolve around Harry Potter.
Definitely. I'd like him to leave it all behind. Alas, I think from both the development in the novels so far and from what Rowling says in the interviews (she's surprised about Draco's popularity) that the boy is doomed to remaining the nemesis-wannabe and comic relief of sorts, being hit by some nasty hex or other at the end of each novel.