Re: Seven for Seven


Thom Madura wrote:
Karnak17 wrote:

Thom Madura wrote:
Karnak17 wrote:
Thom Madura wrote:

<snip>


Gee - and here I thought I was reading a work of fiction.


You are reading posts ABOUT a work of fiction, yes, although I suspect
without your full attention.

My post above is addressing two points made by the previous poster. 1)
That Rowling supports House Elf slavery (in her work of fiction), and
2) that she has conservative values generally (as expressed in a work
of fiction).

I oppose both views, feeling that Rowling 1) opposes House Elf slavery
and portrays it as a great evil (in her fiction), and 2) espouses,
through Dumbledore and other fictitious characters, values which could
be described as "liberal", even if those values are not widely accepted
by her fictitious Wizarding Society generally.


Well - you are nearly correct about my attention - since I have been
moving about the threads lately. However - I did realize that someone
else had posted those thoughts. My point was that this is a work of
fiction, there are no REAL house elves, and the values she has used in
the books are designed to SELL BOOKS - not to make political statements.
I believe it would be hard to label JKR herself as Liberal or
Conservative based only on what is written in the books - since she
expresses all sides through her writing.


So we are not allowed to deduce that Rowling opposes slavery or bigotry
due to the way she portrays slavery and bigotry in her books. But YOU
are allowed to say that she is acting from completely mercenary motives
when she writes, and YOU are allowed to say that all her values are
assumed purely for the point of selling stuff.

That is rubbish

1 - You are clearly not from the entertainment industry I work in.

It is rubbish that you, on the one hand, presume to argue what
Rowling's opinions are in life, while claiming others cannot make
limited judgements EVEN about what moral attitudes she is conveying in
her WORK. A double standard. Hypocritial. Etc.

2 - What I should have made clearer was that the story lines in the
books are NOT there to make political statements -

You can say that if you like.

<snip>
She has made statements which contradict your presumption that all her
values are purely put on just to sell stuff. She said that she is
writing this series because she has something to say that is important
to her. I'm sure she wants to make lots of money, but that has nothing
to do with anything.

Writers write books to make money just as Plumbers fix plumbing to make
money. To say that money has "nothing to do with anything" is completely
absurd. My point is that we cannot automatically assume that her
position on a subject will agree with the position of one (or more)
characters in the books. For example - she is expressing through
Hermione that "slavery is wrong" - but she is also expressing through
most others that they don't care about it. Sure seems to me that she is
taking BOTH sides of the issue in the books - since she writes all of
the characters.

So you are trying to say that it is impossible for us to come to any
opinion on whether Rowling regards enslaving House Elves as wrong based
on the books? Do you hold this same opinion with regards to whether
the murders committed by Tom Riddle are wrong? If Mr. Sueme had been
disputing that Tom Riddles murders were right according to Rowling, and
I had contradicted him, would you have barged in crying out "And here I
thought I was reading a work of fiction", and lecturing us that Rowling
only wants to make money, and has no opinion on the murder of children
because YOU work in the entertainment industry and YOU say so?

So she is trying to say something through her books. One of those
things, CLEARLY, is that slavery is wrong.

As I said above - she has said it is wrong through Hermione -

And Dumbledore, and Dobby, and she has SHOWN US THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS
of House Elf slavery through Dobby and Kreacher and Winky. But I
suppose if you regard her moral position on Tom Riddle's Murders to be
ambiguous, then I suppose you can look at the Black Household, or Dobby
ironing his hands and trying to throw himself in the fire, and see an
ambiguous attitude towards slavery.

and
Through Ron and Harry (And most others including the twins)

Role models all.

that they
don't care about it. SHe has created conflict - but hasn't really taken
sides personally.

Another is, CLEARLY, that
bigotry is wrong. She is writing, she says, "about evil". And doing
a good job, imho.


Yes she is writing about evil and good - it was supposed to be a series
of children's books. ANd yes - she does write well. THe moral tone of
the books is clear that good is preferred over evil -

But, according to you, it is "impossible to decide" whether or not
slavery and bigotry count as "good" or "evil", because she has
pro-slave and pro-bigot characters. Again, do you hold this same
position regarding the murder of children in the books or no?

I suppose she could just be a sociopath who really
doesn't care about right and wrong and is just trying to sell books,
and faking the whole moral aspect, but I can still judge the moral tone
of her books themselves. And I say again, within this work of FICTION,
slavery is CLEARLY meant to be EVIL. And I don't know WHAT THE HELL
the fact that House Elves DON'T REALLY EXIST has to do with that.

What it means is that she is not taking the true slavery issue on
directly. Witches and wizards do not take other witches and wizards as
slaves - which is the issue of slavery.

In an imaginary world - wizards and witches have imaginary creatures
THAT ARE NOT THE SAME AS THEMSELVES as servants.

Like white people and black people. Uh, huh.

In today's world,
People still OWN creatures that are not the same as they are as guards,
workers, etc. (Guard dogs, cows, chickens).

Black people. Women.

Neither you nor I consider a
Guard dog to be a slave - even though it is an intelligent creature
OWNED by its master.

What a contemptible argument.

Maybe a house elf is more like his master than a guard dog is - but the
elf is clearly defined as something different - so the issue is not
exactly the same as well.

YOU were the one who said it was FICTION. So NOW what are you talking
about? It isn't the same as the real world????? You DON"T SAY!!!!!!!!

We can still make a judgement as to what her moral position is on the
COMPLETELY FICTITIOUS SITUATION she has created. At least I can. You
apparently insist that only ONE motive can be discerned from her
writing, it is the motive YOU see in it -- the motive for making money
-- and all other motives are moot because YOU say so. That is a very
high-handed attitude, and not conducive to productive or enjoyable
discussion.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Seven for Seven
    ... You are reading posts ABOUT a work of fiction, yes, although I suspect ... feeling that Rowling 1) opposes House Elf slavery ... the books are designed to SELL BOOKS - not to make political statements. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Wild Rumpus about fraud
    ... looking at even though the books where a work of fiction. ... profound effect on my life and my view of the world. ... hallucinations as I wandered alone all night in the Arizona desert ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: Seven for Seven
    ... IF you want me to say that JKR is against the enslavement of House elves in the real world - I will continue to say that this is a fictional story line without direct corelation to the real world. ... If you want me to say that the books are against slavery as appeared on earth - there is no direct mention of enslavement of Wizards and Witches - so there is no basis for this opinion. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Seven for Seven
    ... alone on what is presented in the books - most issues have two sides - ... YOU say or what MY opinion is (OF child killing, slavery and other ... Witches and wizards do not take other witches and wizards as ... SAME AS THEMSELVES, which happens to be, in real life, the excuse ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Science fiction stories set in todays world?
    ... fiction novel set in the world, today, not the near future (or if the ... Secret Masters books are *normally* set in the roughly-present. ... This also extends to fantasy (cf. Elizabeth Hand's ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)