WTF Tonks?

[sistermagpie]

So mere weeks before the release of DH I somehow have something to say about a storyline in HBP. It's two years late, but I need to pick every bone. I was reading stuff today about strong and weak characters, some of which I disagreed with, and unsurprisingly the Tonks storyline came up. I'm not really taking a position here on whether the story was good or bad for whatever reasons, but what I do think was that

Tonks storyline was useful for several reasons in terms of what JKR needed in the plot:

It gives Lupin, the last Marauder, a happy ending, which JKR may have wanted to do for its own sake.

It gives her another way to keep Sirius talked about through Hermione's false conclusion that Tonks was in love with Sirius. Any way to get Sirius in is good, imo, because I think he'll be coming up again in DH.

What it adds to the Fleur vs. The Weasleys storyline. It gives JKR a way to show that the female Weasleys feel about Fleur is obvious. Fleur's negativity is clear in her comments about the radio and the house, but the fact that it's so believable and acceptable that Mrs. Weasley might be trying to set Lupin up with another woman sets up Fleur's anger in the end because although we might have cheered them on (or not) we have seen the Weasleys being unwelcoming and obvious they don't want her in the family. When Fleur accuses them of "'oping" the engagement will end now that Bill is injured, it can't be denied, because they've been 'oping so much it seemed believable that Molly was actively trying to break them up.

These last two I think are cool, because they get into Rowling's mysteries (link to a past post that can be skipped), and also a paper I loved at Phoenix Rising about how Rowling uses repetition. Whenever there's a revelation in the books, the elements of it are probably going to have been presented to us already in some other way. In Tonks' case it gives JKR a way to show two things that will be important in other storylines:

It shows someone losing their powers due to stress. Yeah, it could be unfortunate they're both women and it's for love, but love is after all a big theme in HBP. And Rowling has to some way show the possibility of someone losing their powers. Being a Metamophagus, Tonks is a good candidate for this, because she's the only witch who walks around with a sign of her powers that people can see all the time. When her hair goes mousy when she's usually kept it pink, it's like Harry can see her "power" light isn't on. (At the same time, she does retain her basic magic power, so it's not like she becomes useless. She just telegraphs that powers can be lost this way. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the whole reason for giving her the power.

At the same time, Tonks is not losing her powers over lost love. She's lost her powers because she's worried she *will* lose someone she loves. And that's the other storyline she's illuminating, which is the Draco one. When I first read HBP for a while I wondered if Voldemort hadn't put some sort of wasting-away curse on the Black family. Turns out it wasn't genetic, except that Tonks had inherited the Black gene for suffering operatically. Harry does specifically connect Tonks and Draco the second time he notices Draco's physical decline, saying he's lost weight "like Tonks." Ultimately they are deteriorating for the same reason, worry that they will lose their loved ones. (Though of course Draco's also worried about himself, and got other issues.)

Anyway, that's my defense of the Tonks storyline, or at least what I think it's doing there. It's kind of reflecting a lot of minor issues about other storylines, and presenting certain technical things that are important elsewhere.

Comments

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was the whole reason for giving her the power.

On that I think it's more just something that's cool. But even then it was only the cool thing in OOTP. It was used for other purposes in HBP, like you say, so maybe there will be some bigger reason for her having the power in DH. It certainly seems like her ability to disguise could be a major plot point.

As far as criticism of Tonks I don't care at all about Remus/Tonks or that plot line, beyond being happy for the characters if they're happy. But Tonks, like all the prominent female characters, aside from McGonagall, seems to be criticized quite harshly in fandom by women. I know I posted on that before but it's as if women aren't happy if the female characters act in ways they themselves wouldn't. Ginny's a slut for going out with a few guys. Tonks is weak because of Remus. Molly isn't a good role-model for not choosing to have a career. Hermione acts completely OOC for dealing with Ron/Lavender badly. Cho is a bitch for going out with Harry.

All while horrible men are romanticized. There seems to be a lot of self-misogyny in this fandom.

[thomasofdelain.livejournal.com]

There seems to be a lot of self-misogyny in this fandom.

I've always interpreted a certain amount of misogyny in the books (which I guess would automatically fall under 'self-misogyny', the author being a woman.)
Which isn't to excuse it being perpetuated in fandom, and to far greater extents at times, but fandoms aren't vaccuums.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think it's often common that if somebody bothers you, they bother you more if they're your own gender. People may just feel more free with the male characters to change them around or see the good in them. I've actually noticed the opposite as well, where men seem to be harder on the male characters--of course in fandom that often sounds like the women are being too soft on them, but I don't know that that's true. I've seen exceptions to the rule, but I've also run into plenty of men who are more judgmental about the male characters they don't like than a woman might be...but that's anecdotal. There's also more major male characters to choose from, so the hate might get spread around.

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

It's pretty tough to get an idea of whether or not there is any consensus among men in this fandom. I think I have one or maybe two men on my flist. There are some other male authors I know of but they tend to not write things I'm very interested in reading. Which isn't to say I dislike male authors in general but a sample size of ten or so isn't going to be representative. My own bookshelf is probably 2/3 male authors in fiction and then almost exclusively male in technical subjects (math, physics, computer science, etc.).

I understand there are fandoms with more men involved, like certain anime, but I doubt I'll ever be into them, at least not like this. But a comparison would be interesting just to see how issues like gender and judgment are dealt with.

As for the characters I really dislike there's Umbridge, Voldemort, and Lucius; the twins and Snape are up there as well. Which makes fic like Hermione/Lucius smuff hard to wrap my mind around.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

You're completely right that there is a lot of misogyny in fandom, but I think some of the analysis of gender comes from a genuine feminist place. That sort of analysis doesn't have to be in bad faith even if you disagree with it.

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

I usually find analysis of any sort pretty interesting even when I do disagree. But if the starting point is truly in bad faith, like Ginny is a slut or, for a non-feminist example, Ron is an abuser, then there's not much room for reasonable discussion.

sorry, making something clearer

[malafede.livejournal.com]

I just reread my comment and I hope it didn't come across as being too blunt! I like that a lot of people are ready to defend female characters, because I think they often are bashed out of misogyny and that needs to be exposed (I hate both the Ginny-is-a-slut stuff and Ron-is-an-abuser stuff.) I'm a bit defensive of feminist readings because they often get dismissed as being in bad faith whereas often both sides are really arguing from the same love of women. For example, there are some female characters that I really like that I still think suffer (in different degrees) from the sexism of their authors.

Re: sorry, making something clearer

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

You didn't come across as too blunt!

I can see being defensive about feminism. At least in the US it's almost a dirty word in some circles and there is very often a dismissive attitude towards it, which is unfortunate. I don't see HP as a feminist work. Maybe, in some ways, post-feminist in that there don't really seem to be barriers towards women in the wizarding world.

Any examples of female characters that suffer from the sexism of their authors, especially in HP?

Re: sorry, making something clearer

[malafede.livejournal.com]

HP is actually a difficult example because it could be read in many different ways depending on your frame of reference. I also think that absolutely JKR wants to do good by the female characters, and she wrote many of them as being kick ass and much more together than their male counterparts. I think the prolematic stuff could be seen when looking at the relative agency, something Sistermagpie talked about once where by being more contained, the storylines of the female characters end up being subordinated to the male narratives. The male characters have more narrative freedom by being allowed to be fucked up. I also cringe a bit from the portrayal of characters like Lavender and Pansy. But I think that ultimately the various readings cancel each other and you end up with a product that's neither feminist neither antifeminist.

I was mostly thinking about other fandoms, like the Cameron character in House suffered in the beginning for being placed as the love interest and sort of put onto a pedestal, and some of the undercurrents in Doctor Who. I'm also in manga fandom and a storyline that's often repeated is the one about the girl "having to waite" while the boys face the risks of adventure, even though I've seen it subverted at least once. I would quote more stuff from manga but I don't know if you're into it!

Re: sorry, making something clearer

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

Mags's post on the women's stories being more self-contained was quite interesting.

It's been awhile since I've watched House. I only really watched the first season regularly. And I don't follow anime/manga.

But you noted "girl "having to waite" while the boys face the risks of adventure." I think that's true and a desire for passive female characters in general. I most like Ron het fic in HP so I end up reading a lot of R/Hr stories and she's almost invariably passive. The relationship always depends on Ron; he's responsible for them being together or not and any problems they have are almost always his fault. If Hermione is temporarily with another man it's because Ron failed to make a move. He's got to suck it up and deal with his jealousy. Prior to HBP the fic is probably 10:1 with Ron jealous over Hermione jealous of another love interest for Ron. Even now it's still 7:1 that way, despite Lavender! It's also shown through the other characters in those stories. If Hermione is upset Harry or Ginny will almost always ask "What's Ron done this time?"

I realize some of those things do come out of canon. Hermione was passive with the Yule Ball with both Ron and Viktor. But by HBP she's become aware that passivity isn't working. Yet most fic authors still seem to be stuck on GOF. For the most part JKR's female characters do take an active role, in at least some aspect of their lives.

I didn't mean to rant about fic to this extent!

[spare-change.livejournal.com]

I think it's awfully sexist to assume that if a woman doesn't like Tonks (or any other female character), then she must be misogynist.

I mean, I hate Remus: does this mean I hate men? Or werewolves? Or people who wear ratty sweaters?

I don't like him based on his character, not on his gender. Same goes for the female characters I'm not fond of.

[kerosinkanister.livejournal.com]

I didn't intend to suggest that disliking a female character was misogynistic. But I do think there is a lot of misogyny in this fandom. For an example unrelated to female characters, and least in the specifics, see the "het is disgusting" attitude espoused by some straight, at least in practice, women.

[spare-change.livejournal.com]

I get what you're saying, I do. But, you know, human sexuality is so strange and fluid that I don't really care if practicing heterosexuals don't want to read about another woman's squishy bits. I mean, I like reading slash but I can't bear to watch gay porn -- does that make me a homophobe? And I can't stand reading femmeslash but I like looking at naked women -- does that make me a misogynist?

Or just someone with her own idiosyncratic likes and dislikes?

That's not to say that there aren't larger trends in fandom, and that problematic sexual politics may underlie them, but since we can't legislate what people find desirable or squicky, I prefer to focus my (significant) fandom ire elsewhere! :D