fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5852 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5852 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

[Nu: Carnival]

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for Attack on Titan/Berserk]

__________________________________________________

09. [SPOILERS for Scum Villain's Self-Saving System]

__________________________________________________

10. [SPOILERS for Deltarune]

__________________________________________________

11. [WARNING for discussion of non-con themes]

__________________________________________________

12. [WARNING for discussion of pedophilia/non-con]

__________________________________________________

13. [WARNING for discussion of suicide, sexual assault, sexual assault involving a minor]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #837.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yeah, I don't either. If someone was going to get sniffy about her characterizations, I would have expected them to go after the happy servant underclass of barefooted house elves in literal rags. Perhaps the way she portrayed Hermione's clueless anti-slavery defense in the books dissuades this, but outside of the story? It still seems to me that "oh no, we'd be INSULTING our workers by giving them money or days off or any of the things they've ever historically wanted," is a pretty problematic take on class in Britain. Even if it's set in idealized, imaginary Britain. And there's the whole thing where even "poor" wizards are basically living in luxury compared to even middle-class muggles, that no one gets into. And the fact that the boarding schools Hogwarts was based on are essentially for the ultra-rich and the future prime minister. If anyone wanted to take a hard look at economics in the wizarding world, they'd come up with a lot more to think about than the way they're currently hyperfocusing on the bank employees.

Also, Anthony Goldstein exists, and there's plenty of other students at Hogwarts who could be Jewish ... and yet critics are adamant that one of dozens of non-human races are "supposed" to represent Judaism in HP. The evidence that Rowling did that seems negligible. Snape is an unpleasant villain with a big nose and a reputation for ratting out other kids as a student and poisoning/murdering innocent people later on, and somehow no one's accusing her of having made him Jewish these days. At least, as far as I know - they could be. I heard that complaint repeatedly back when no one knew which side of the conflict he was actually working for. And then haven't run into it at all, since book 7 came out.

1) To be perfectly clear, I don’t think the goblins are intended as explicitly antisemitic. But they could perhaps be considered an unfortunate modern instance of some antisemitic tropes being thrown together uncritically.

That doesn’t seem out of character for Rowling, who seems more into referencing than dissecting. Pratchett, especially later on, did a lot of dissecting and “playing with”, which makes his use of fantasy lore hit a bit different.

2) “What about the house elves?”
People who are critical of the goblins’ portrayal can also think that the house elves’ portrayal is bad. Or even worse. Multiple things can be bad and they can be different levels of bad, but all worth talking about.

People have been loudly complaining about the house elves since they were introduced in the books. And the discourse gets stirred up again every so often. The goblins seem to be getting more attention and discussion now because they are featured in the video game.

I got the impression Jo really didn't bother examining the underlying... issues in the old boarding-school fiction like the Greyfriars books.

Come to think of it, given her depicition of fat folks in those books it's amazing we didn't get the wizarding world version of Billy Bunter...

AYRT

1. I'd agree that, overall, Rowling does more trope referencing than deconstructing. But I think what people tend to hear when someone claims her goblins are anti-semitic is that, if they let children read HP, they will pick up prejudices against Jews from it.

2. While it's true that people can object to both, what I see people objecting to now, any time HP comes up, is that Rowling's political opinions are unwanted, and also this. But your mention that there's a (new?) video game, and the goblins have a larger role in it, may explain a lot.

People have very strong criticisms of the house-elf stuff. It is not mutually exclusive, where people can only have problems with one or the other. People can and do object to both. People can and do have problems with the wizarding world more broadly, and also with goblins.

Second, I don't think the argument that Rowling's presentation of goblins is anti-Semitic entails that Goblins are "'supposed' to represent Judaism". She made them look like anti-Semitic Jewish caricatures and then made them bankers who are untrustworthy and obsessed with money. I don't know what her state of mind was at the time she was writing it, but I think she was at the very least negligent: she *ought* have known that those choices would lead to a bad outcome. And then the other thing is that the choices made in subsequent adaptations have seemed to make the situation worse, not better.

All of the above and also Severus's nose is a joke on the the aquiline nose of the romans (the description of his nose is patently how people describe aquiline noses), he's named for an emperor.

Not AYRT but I thought he was based on one of JKR's teachers she disliked.

Anon that the AYRT RT.

I've heard that too. Quite aside from who inspired him, though, it seems a pity to me that none of the "Severus Snape seems so incredibly and problematically Jewish" was followed up with "... and the heroes couldn't have defeated Voldemort without his courageous and long-standing support. Huh. That's not an uncomplicated portrayal, but it is a solidly respectful one."

It's possible that they don't include it because, given that Snape was a direct contributor to Voldemort's initial rise to power, it's not that straight-forward. Is Snape the only person who could have helped fix the problems he helped create? Maybe, although it's just as likely that one of the multiple people he helped kill when he was still working for Voldemort could have stepped up and taken his place if he hadn't helped murder them. And if Snape had never been in the picture at all, the main things that change are that the Cold War between the Death Eaters and the rest of the Wizarding World stays a little warmer and Harry and Neville probably have at least a couple of living parents between them growing up. "Stuck around to help fix his mistakes because his incel ass had nothing else left after he got Lily killed" is not particularly complicated or respectful, but it sure is what we got.

I'm talking about the connection between name and nose.

don't call me muggle, honky

[ SECRET POST #5852 ]

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...

Re: Secrets you don't want to make...