I think the point where my dissatisfaction with her moral vision really crystallized (beyond the whole Slytherin = EVIL!!! trope, which I disliked since PS/SS) was after reading DH. I saw an essay by somebody (details escape me) praising the moral lessons of the story and talking about how Harry makes mistakes but that his impulse is toward love and goodness, and that this is a very hopeful thing to show children.
And I thought, wait a minute. Harry's impulse was to use Cruciatus on someone for the horrible, unforgivable crime of... insulting Professor McGonagall? And after feeling no remorse for that, he then goes on to demand that Voldemort feel remorse?
To which I say, hypocrite! And also, what happened to you, Harry? How did you go from the boy who couldn't cast Cruciatus after watching Bellatrix kill Sirius, to a person who can wish crushing agony on someone for a trivial insult? (Okay, the person in question was a Death Eater and had also been oppressing Hogwarts all year, but still. There is a massive disjoin between provocation and response.)
Rowling lets her 'good guys' get away with murder, literally. They are good not because they're necessarily objectively good, but because they're subjectively good -- i.e., they're 'her side.' She writes against prejudice, but undermines that message constantly by showing prejudice against Slytherins as a good thing. She shows how the broken legal system of the wizarding world can bite her side in the ass, but she doesn't ever let anyone criticize it systematically; they just criticize the choice of 'victim.' (In other words, if the Malfoys got a rigged trial, I don't think Rowling would have batted an eye.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-09 07:04 pm (UTC)And I thought, wait a minute. Harry's impulse was to use Cruciatus on someone for the horrible, unforgivable crime of... insulting Professor McGonagall? And after feeling no remorse for that, he then goes on to demand that Voldemort feel remorse?
To which I say, hypocrite! And also, what happened to you, Harry? How did you go from the boy who couldn't cast Cruciatus after watching Bellatrix kill Sirius, to a person who can wish crushing agony on someone for a trivial insult? (Okay, the person in question was a Death Eater and had also been oppressing Hogwarts all year, but still. There is a massive disjoin between provocation and response.)
Rowling lets her 'good guys' get away with murder, literally. They are good not because they're necessarily objectively good, but because they're subjectively good -- i.e., they're 'her side.' She writes against prejudice, but undermines that message constantly by showing prejudice against Slytherins as a good thing. She shows how the broken legal system of the wizarding world can bite her side in the ass, but she doesn't ever let anyone criticize it systematically; they just criticize the choice of 'victim.' (In other words, if the Malfoys got a rigged trial, I don't think Rowling would have batted an eye.)
...
Argh.