![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Oh, right. Apparently I have no middle gears. First I don't update for, like, two weeks at all, and then I am unable to shut up.
But there is something I have to address before it slips from my mind (like many other brilliant thoughts have done before, I am sure). You know how half the fandom is convinced that Rowling is oblivious to the fact that her hero characters, the ones on the side of Light, have flaws and faults and that they base their judgement on moral values which are more than dubious? Within the space of the last few days, I have read posts and comments accusing her of painting black-and-white characters, of thinking Harry, Hermione, Dumbledore, Sirius etc. are always right, of never questioning her characters' actions and of thinking that Gryffindors can never go wrong.
Obviously, the characters don't question their actions - Harry and Hermione especially are scarily self-righteous - but does is hence follow that Rowling is unaware of the fact that their judgement is flawed? I, for one, don't think so. Yes, she says she likes Sirius and dislikes Snape, but you know what? I like Sirius better than Snape, too. I don't think that Sirius is "good", that he's the "rebel with a heart of gold", but I like him nevertheless. His flaws undeniably exist, but he's got redeeming values, and I like him for them. I realise that Remus is passive-agressive and liar, but it doesn't stop me from loving him. As to Harry - poor, angry, capslock Harry - I love him since OotP, because he has finally realised that he is trapped in a nightmare and reacts accordingly. And the only way he can vocalise his anger and pain is by lashing out at people - which also happens to be Snape's method (whom I likewise adore, though not as much as Sirius).
Somehow, I do suspect Rowling is - on the whole - intelligent enough to realise that. She has created a number of fascinating, multi-layered characters, and she likes them not because she doesn't see their flaws but in spite of them. Or would she be entitled to liking her good guys only if they were flawless, never erred and their moral judgement never failed? I don't agree with her moral values in many instances, but I don't think that she completely fails to see that her good guys are ridiculously self-righteous.
( And this is where Ron comes into play: )
So why I agree that Hermione, especially OotP Hermione, represents the authorial voice, I have begun to suspect that Ron is the meta commentator. Hermione gives us background information and tells us what is happening during the narrative, but Ron tells us what is going to happen and questions the characters' actions on a meta level. In any case, I will pay more attention to Ron when reading HBP.
But there is something I have to address before it slips from my mind (like many other brilliant thoughts have done before, I am sure). You know how half the fandom is convinced that Rowling is oblivious to the fact that her hero characters, the ones on the side of Light, have flaws and faults and that they base their judgement on moral values which are more than dubious? Within the space of the last few days, I have read posts and comments accusing her of painting black-and-white characters, of thinking Harry, Hermione, Dumbledore, Sirius etc. are always right, of never questioning her characters' actions and of thinking that Gryffindors can never go wrong.
Obviously, the characters don't question their actions - Harry and Hermione especially are scarily self-righteous - but does is hence follow that Rowling is unaware of the fact that their judgement is flawed? I, for one, don't think so. Yes, she says she likes Sirius and dislikes Snape, but you know what? I like Sirius better than Snape, too. I don't think that Sirius is "good", that he's the "rebel with a heart of gold", but I like him nevertheless. His flaws undeniably exist, but he's got redeeming values, and I like him for them. I realise that Remus is passive-agressive and liar, but it doesn't stop me from loving him. As to Harry - poor, angry, capslock Harry - I love him since OotP, because he has finally realised that he is trapped in a nightmare and reacts accordingly. And the only way he can vocalise his anger and pain is by lashing out at people - which also happens to be Snape's method (whom I likewise adore, though not as much as Sirius).
Somehow, I do suspect Rowling is - on the whole - intelligent enough to realise that. She has created a number of fascinating, multi-layered characters, and she likes them not because she doesn't see their flaws but in spite of them. Or would she be entitled to liking her good guys only if they were flawless, never erred and their moral judgement never failed? I don't agree with her moral values in many instances, but I don't think that she completely fails to see that her good guys are ridiculously self-righteous.
( And this is where Ron comes into play: )
So why I agree that Hermione, especially OotP Hermione, represents the authorial voice, I have begun to suspect that Ron is the meta commentator. Hermione gives us background information and tells us what is happening during the narrative, but Ron tells us what is going to happen and questions the characters' actions on a meta level. In any case, I will pay more attention to Ron when reading HBP.
