« Previous Post | Index | Next Post »
Jimmy Pickle wrote:
I just finished reading the "Snape and Respect" thread and couldn't believe there are readers out there that thought Snape or Slytherin were hard done by in the whole - Dumbledore point awarding affair at the end of book one.
Yes, HPfGU really is unbelievable that way, isn't it? Did you know that there are actually some people around here who don't think that Ron and Harry are inconsiderate? That there are people who didn't read the Twins as bullies? That there are people who felt no sympathy—none!—for Peter Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack (no kidding! Just go back through the archives! You'll see that I'm telling the absolute truth! It's incredible!)? There are people who think that Snape never got his hands dirty back when he was a Death Eater. There are people who actually thought that Ton-Tongue toffee was funny. There are people who didn't find Lockhart a supremely irritating character. There are people who don't like Lupin. There are people who don't like Hagrid. There are people who don't like Snape. There are people who don't like Ginny.
Why, there are even a couple of people around here who think that Sirius Black, of all people, is Sexy!
Can you believe it? What a wacky world we live in, eh?
So, if you Love Snape and think he was mis-treated, if you cheer when Slytherin win, if Malfoy the bouncing ferret brought a tear to your eye (and not from laughing - like mine was), if you're hoping that Lupin/Black/Dumbledore/McGonagall/etc turn out to be Evil, then you are reading the wrong book
If you do not at least see something to admire about Snape, then how do you construct the end of GoF? What do you make of the idea of a parallelism being drawn in GoF between Snape and Peter Pettigrew? What do you see as Karkaroff's function in the text, if he is not meant in part to serve as a double to Snape? If we're merely meant to hate him, then what do you make of that long appraising exchange of stares between Snape and Harry at the end of GoF?
If you do not see any elements of injustice in Snape's treatment, then what do you perceive as the role of "Snape's Grudge" in relation to PoA's thematic emphasis on the spiritual perils of vengeance and the dwelling on past wrongs?
If you see nothing disturbing about the bouncing ferret incident, then doesn't that sort of weaken for you the raw emotional power of GoF's moral complexity, of the novel's erosion of the boundaries between how Death Eaters behave and how their enemies (as well as ordinary citizens) behave? It would for me, I think. But I am not you.
(I also assume that you weren't trying to read GoF as a Whodunnit!)
We're likely not reading the same books, no. But I think that the books I've been reading are pretty darned good, and so far, they've grown more to my literary tastes with each volume. I have hopes that this trend will continue.
The books that you've been reading are, I'm sure, every bit as rewarding to you as mine are to me. Perhaps we would not care much for each others' "copies" of the books, though. That's okay. The same readings are never going to seem equally rewarding or enriching to everyone.
One of the main purposes of a discussion group, as I see it, is to serve as a forum in which members can share with each other their differing interpretations of the books, in large part so that they can come to new insights—and therefore new pleasures—in regard to the text.
When people propose readings of the text which strike me as unfruitful or simplistic or unrewarding, or which just (for reasons I cannot even articulate) squick me somehow, then I do indeed often feel tempted to tell them they are wrong. I think, though, that this is something I need to guard myself against. I think that it would probably be far more informative and pleasant for everyone in the long run to resist that temptation. After all, it often turns out that other people are seeing things in the books that I find rewarding as well, once I'm willing to give them a try.
Or not. Sometimes when you try a new food, after all, it really does taste every bit as disgusting as you thought it would. That happens too—especially to me. I'm a pretty picky eater. ;-)
But you know, that doesn't mean that the food is disgusting in any objective sense of the term. It usually just means that it suits some tastes and not others.
There would be little point to this group's existence if we all read the books in precisely the same way. It would be very boring, and not in the least bit instructive to anyone. There would also be little point to the group—for me, at any rate—if I considered other people's understandings of the story to be the "wrong books." If I truly felt that way, then why on earth would I be here? Why not just stick with my own reading and be content with that, rather than seeking out the opinions of others?
I'm here to learn about other people's readings of the books. After all, I already know what I think. If there weren't a multiplicity of viewpoints represented here, I'd have moved on months ago.
Nonetheless, there are many groups out there which do cater to particular readings or interpretations of this text. There are pro-Snape groups and pro-Lupin groups and R/H groups and H/H groups. I'm even given to understand that there is a Cho Is Evil group out there somewhere, for those who like that sort of thing. ;-)
This group, however, does not adhere to any "party line" of interpretation, reading or critical approach, and that is one of the main reasons that I am here, rather than on one of those other groups. I would humbly suggest that perhaps those who find diverse viewpoints very upsetting or threatening to their own personal take on the canon might just be reading the wrong list. There are alternatives which do not adhere to the same policy of inclusivity and which therefore do not host as large or as diverse a multiplicity of viewpoints.
—Elkins
Posted to HPfGU by Elkins on January 30, 2003 2:51 PM
« Previous Post | Index | Next Post »