It seems to be considered cowardly to use subterfuge. I, otoh, can't help but admire good spies. As far as I can see the most effective characters are the spies--Snape and Peter.
Which of course explains why Slytherins are evil! They're all sneaks! So they deserve being hexed into unconsciousness or brain damage!
I'm not a big stickler for rules myself, and I've been known to break some on principle because I didn't agree with them, but basically a follow them because I see the point of them. That appears to me to often be as far as rules can be understood--sometimes they are for your benefit even if they interfere with what you want at that moment.
Yes! Despite Hermione's lectures, this universe seems to completely lack any understanding that rules are there for a purpose, even when they're (*gasp*) not to your advantage. Disagreeing on principle I can respect; breaking rules for an important reason I can accept. Having no sort of respect for any kinds of rules at all is what makes me furious with the books who promote such utter anarchy.
People will sometimes claim that Harry follows authority that he respects, and only rebels against bad authority, but this isn't true. He doesn't listen to anyone unless they're saying what he wants to hear, really.
Another thing to be irritated by: this infuriating inability to see the validity of any viewpoint other than his own. This ties in with what I said earlier about people you can't argue rationally with. They drive me up the walls in RL, and as characters I constantly want to smack some sense into them. Harry, as the supposed promoter of tolerance (standing against the prejudiced Muggle-hating Death Eaters) is in fact one of the most intolerant and self-absorbed fictional "heroes" I've ever come across.
I wrote a thing once about this sort of thing. It compares the view of authority in HP to LOTR, but I don't think you have to know LOTR very well for it (and maybe you do know it well!).
I remember reading that essay a while back; I may reread it later. And I do know LOTR reasonably well, even if I never was much of a fan.
I am waiting for it to become clear that if Hermione continues along this way she's in big trouble, I'm just not sure that's what the books have in mind!
As I said earlier, if this were portrayed as Hermione's Descent into Darkness I wouldn't be disturbed by it - I would consider it good character development and an interesting storyline. I might expect something like that, if JKR's interviews didn't speak a completely different language that supports the most insidious subtext in the books while ignoring all the complexities she herself introduced into the characters. I really can't hold much faith in JKR's ethics, especially not after OotP, so I'd rather not get my hopes up.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-09-03 08:21 am (UTC)Which of course explains why Slytherins are evil! They're all sneaks! So they deserve being hexed into unconsciousness or brain damage!
I'm not a big stickler for rules myself, and I've been known to break some on principle because I didn't agree with them, but basically a follow them because I see the point of them.
That appears to me to often be as far as rules can be understood--sometimes they are for your benefit even if they interfere with what you want at that moment.
Yes! Despite Hermione's lectures, this universe seems to completely lack any understanding that rules are there for a purpose, even when they're (*gasp*) not to your advantage. Disagreeing on principle I can respect; breaking rules for an important reason I can accept. Having no sort of respect for any kinds of rules at all is what makes me furious with the books who promote such utter anarchy.
People will sometimes claim that Harry follows authority that he respects, and only rebels against bad authority, but this isn't true. He doesn't listen to anyone unless they're saying what he wants to hear, really.
Another thing to be irritated by: this infuriating inability to see the validity of any viewpoint other than his own. This ties in with what I said earlier about people you can't argue rationally with. They drive me up the walls in RL, and as characters I constantly want to smack some sense into them. Harry, as the supposed promoter of tolerance (standing against the prejudiced Muggle-hating Death Eaters) is in fact one of the most intolerant and self-absorbed fictional "heroes" I've ever come across.
I wrote a thing once about this sort of thing. It compares the view of authority in HP to LOTR, but I don't think you have to know LOTR very well for it (and maybe you do know it well!).
I remember reading that essay a while back; I may reread it later. And I do know LOTR reasonably well, even if I never was much of a fan.
I am waiting for it to become clear that if Hermione continues along this way she's in big trouble, I'm just not sure that's what the books have in mind!
As I said earlier, if this were portrayed as Hermione's Descent into Darkness I wouldn't be disturbed by it - I would consider it good character development and an interesting storyline. I might expect something like that, if JKR's interviews didn't speak a completely different language that supports the most insidious subtext in the books while ignoring all the complexities she herself introduced into the characters. I really can't hold much faith in JKR's ethics, especially not after OotP, so I'd rather not get my hopes up.