All this Time I Thought J.K. Rowling was a Democrat
As most of you know, I will have my first day of classes on Monday. To commemorate the end of my freedom, I have given in to Michael's pleading and read the most recent Harry Potter. He said I was driving him to the Harry Potter fan sites cause he had no one to talk to about it.
Well, now that I'm done I have a crumple-horned snorkack bone to pick with J.K. Rowling. I've been defending these books (against my mom, primarily, but she's tenacious) on the grounds that they display deeper moral complexity than most grownup stories. Law & Order, for instance, does not stack up. Okay, so the prose is not of C.S. Lewis quality, but I find the magical parts charming, and most of the characters ditto. But my defense really rests on the character of Professor Snape.
ALERT ALERT ALERT SPOILING OF MULTIPLE ENDINGS ENSUES.
Up until this last book, Snape was a rare creation. It may not sound like all that much that to point out that he seems like an obvious bad guy and isn't, but that's rarer than you think, if you actually start paying attention to it. It's better than that, though; Snape is a reformed evil wizard who fights on the side of good but still holds unreasonable grudges against our hero and generally behaves evilly short only of actually being evil. He's impossible to like, and he's not a kind person, but he's not a villain either. That's seriously rare stuff in popular fiction or movies for that matter. I thought maybe Rowling belonged to Al-Anon.
But it would seem from this last book that Snape has always been evil after all--in spite of having saved Harry's life. I see one loophole: I think when Dumbledore was pleading with Snape in his last moments he might have been pleading for him to kill him. Rowling has one book left in which to exploit this loophole before I join in with the book burners in Alamogordo. Otherwise, I'm going to have to find some other reason to defend my having read six of these things.
And I know your fingers are itching to point out that there are no Democrats in Scotland, but I submit to you that voting Labor hardly captures what I was going for, i.e. a moral dichotomy not involving Tony Blair.
Well, now that I'm done I have a crumple-horned snorkack bone to pick with J.K. Rowling. I've been defending these books (against my mom, primarily, but she's tenacious) on the grounds that they display deeper moral complexity than most grownup stories. Law & Order, for instance, does not stack up. Okay, so the prose is not of C.S. Lewis quality, but I find the magical parts charming, and most of the characters ditto. But my defense really rests on the character of Professor Snape.
ALERT ALERT ALERT SPOILING OF MULTIPLE ENDINGS ENSUES.
Up until this last book, Snape was a rare creation. It may not sound like all that much that to point out that he seems like an obvious bad guy and isn't, but that's rarer than you think, if you actually start paying attention to it. It's better than that, though; Snape is a reformed evil wizard who fights on the side of good but still holds unreasonable grudges against our hero and generally behaves evilly short only of actually being evil. He's impossible to like, and he's not a kind person, but he's not a villain either. That's seriously rare stuff in popular fiction or movies for that matter. I thought maybe Rowling belonged to Al-Anon.
But it would seem from this last book that Snape has always been evil after all--in spite of having saved Harry's life. I see one loophole: I think when Dumbledore was pleading with Snape in his last moments he might have been pleading for him to kill him. Rowling has one book left in which to exploit this loophole before I join in with the book burners in Alamogordo. Otherwise, I'm going to have to find some other reason to defend my having read six of these things.
And I know your fingers are itching to point out that there are no Democrats in Scotland, but I submit to you that voting Labor hardly captures what I was going for, i.e. a moral dichotomy not involving Tony Blair.
2 Comment(s):
- Posted by
at August 27, 2005 7:45 AM |
Permanent Link to this Comment - Posted by at August 27, 2005 7:49 AM |
Permanent Link to this Comment
I'm going with that loophole theory as well. It's too simple if Harry was right about Snape all along, and it's too undignified for Dumbledore to die pleading for his life. Of course, in keeping with the rest of the series, there'll be some twist that's even more complicated than the idea that Dumbledore had some grand plan involving his death.
- sol
By the way,
Spoiler Alert on my comment above as well.
- sol
