sistermagpie | WTF Tonks?

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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

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.

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.

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?

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!

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!

WTF Tonks?

no subject

sorry, making something clearer

Re: sorry, making something clearer

Re: sorry, making something clearer

Re: sorry, making something clearer