Welcome to the Caribbean, Love!

*sigh* Just my luck.

I've been wallowing in Harry Potter nostalgia during this lockdown, indulging myself with some long-overdue essay writing, re-reading the books, discovering new fan fiction, etc., and then finding myself really enjoying Rowling's new children's book "The Ickabog." So naturally J.K. Rowling has to choose this time to remind everyone that it's really important to her that people be defined by whichever sex they were assigned at birth. She got upset enough about a headline saying Creating a More Equal Post-COVID-19 World for People who Menstruate that she made a sarcastic tweet saying:

‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?

This reads to me like a deliberate reference to a sort of feud that has been happening, mostly in the UK, between certain feminists and trans people/trans activists. I don't understand why these feminists think that accepting trans women as women is somehow harmful to cis women or feminism. I read a thing last fall that affected to explain it in a snarky manner, but I still don't get it, except that it seems to be a contingent thing based on personal conflicts and arguments that happened in the past, and built-up resentments from people who consider themselves to be loving and tolerant being yelled at and accused of being hurtful and intolerant.

( oops, I almost forgot about the existence of lj-cuts! )

First, I must thank the kind anonymous person who recently gifted me with 6 months of paid LiveJournal time. My icons came back!!

I suspect the generous giver was responding to my role in l'affaire Msscribe, which recently received renewed attention thanks to this hour-long YouTube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_DZd78WLQY

But, contrary orc that I am, I find myself prompted to return to a different facet of my time in the Harry Potter fandom. After all, Msscribe and all her shenanigans were merely minor and unpleasant distractions from the "heart of it all," which was my deep love for the Harry Potter books and the super-wonderful, brilliant, and hilarious group of friends that I made, most unfairly, while indulging myself in wanky debating, lascivious shipping of fictional teenagers, and mean-spirited snickering at the foolishness of my fellow fans. Which just goes to show that the world is an unjust place and while no good deed goes unpunished, apparently every bad deed is richly rewarded.

So, if my LJ is going to come back to life for a while, what I'd most like to do is finish up some of the unfinished business that still nags at me––the multi-part essays and fanfics where I wrote and posted the first parts but not the planned and in some cases promised sequels. And first among those is the seven part symbolism essay I posted on April Fools Day of 2005, before the sixth and seventh books came out. Many people have asked me about the promised Part 7, the Epilogue, and I was repeatedly forced to admit to them that I never got around to writing it––and to admit to myself that I didn't really know what I wanted to say in it. But now it seems to me that the proper time to write an "Epilogue" is, of course, after the end. Now, surely, with the final two books released and long-digested, I can find more to say!

So ... don't be surprised if sometime during the next few days, this ceases to be an empty link and begins to contain one of my typically pompous and prolix symbolism essays (for, alas, my writing style has not changed one bit in the intervening fifteen years, and I continue to have the same ambivalent attitude toward symbolic analysis that leads me to make fun of it while simultaneously being fascinated by it and irresistibly attracted to performing it).

I just hope I can finish and post this one before April 1, 2021!

Triangles are magical. In structural engineering they are the only sided shape that can't be distorted or collapse at the joints. In drama they are always dynamic. Unlike quartets, which tend to settle into static pairs, triangles present the constant possibility of any two people uniting against the third. It is no wonder they are so often chosen by storytellers of all kinds.

( Triangles Are the Strongest Shape Because Any Added Force Is Evenly Spread Through All Three Sides )

---

Part One: Introduction
Part Two: Pairs
Part Three: Quartets and More
––
Part Five: Conclusion

The simplest romance geometry of all is the pair. It is a perennial classic, used in works from Abelard and Heloise to a large percentage of fan fiction. You will never, ever spark a shipping debate if you limit your romantic potential to one guy and one gal––or two guys or two gals if your audience is accepting. If you want to really dig in and concentrate on the growth of love between two people you can strip away all extraneous distractions and just show the two of them interacting. This geometry is a favorite of serious romances with a deep exploration of character, but it also comes in handy in fiction with a bunch of other plot (war, adventure, mystery, survival, espionage, etc.) that only has room for the bare essentials when it comes to romance. You often see it in traditional male-oriented fiction where "the girl" or "the love interest" is only brought in to fall in love with the hero and she never considers anyone else.

( In the Arithmetic of Love, One Plus One Equals Everything, and Two Minus One Equals Nothing )

---

Part One: Introduction
–
Part Three: Quartets and More
Part Four: Trios
Part Five: Conclusion

Once, a long time ago, I wrote in a "twelve unpopular opinions" meme post:

The Harry Potter series is simple and conventional as literature goes. It is rich but not deep, elaborate but not particularly challenging. These are not faults.

I still think that the Harry Potter series is simple and conventional as literature goes, rich, elaborate, and not particularly challenging, and that these are not faults. However, ever since reading the seventh book, I have felt guilty about writing that "not deep" part. You guys know how I HATE to be wrong. So here, eleven years later, I am taking it back.

( Books can take you only so far in this field )

Okay, that's done. Now, do I need to reconsider that "simple"...?

It feels really weird to be posting on LJ now. For one thing, I know hardly anybody will read it. Then there's that whole thing with Russia and their anti-gay persecution. I have had to agree to Livejournal's user agreement to keep this journal, which gives them the right to yank my LJ at any time without notice, because obviously I'm not going to refrain from posting pro-gay material whenever I feel like it. Losing this LJ would make me very sad, because I'm a compulsive hoarder and archivist and the entries and comments here comprise some of my most treasured memories. I know some of you have deleted your LJs, and I don't see how you could bear to do that. Ah well, I upload to Dreamwidth periodically and I'll, like Chudley Cannon fans, just keep my fingers crossed and hope for the best.

Anyway, I'm in another HP-nostalgia period right now; they seem to strike me every couple of years. I'm re-reading all the books and, just like last time, I find myself with things to say and no place but here that seems right to say them. So I will, whether anyone will ever read it or not.


I can't read the first five books without being constantly reminded of the things we argued about in the never-ending ship debates that I devoted so much of my time to in the 2002–2005 time period. One might think that would harm or lessen my reading enjoyment now, but the case is far, far otherwise--quite the opposite, in fact.

( ... much less vehement and scary than the Harry/Hermione, Ron/Hermione tribes )

Are there any ongoing arguments in the HP world right now that I'm missing? Does anyone know? Or I guess I could try writing post-canon fanfic or something...

I remember back when I first heard about the "Cursed Child" play, I was hardly excited at all. I saw it as kind of a local thing for people who live in London or are visiting there, kind of like the Harry Potter musical (there was something like that, wasn't there?). One of the reasons I wasn't too interested was because it was supposed to be about something that happened to Harry when he was living under the stairs before he got his Hogwarts letter. Interesting, sure, but it couldn't have been too important if we never heard about it in seven books.

( sorry I forgot to cut this at first )

This is the third part of my attempt to cast light on the writing of J.K. Rowling in the Harry Potter series using the new information of her subsequent works. Part 1 (feminism) is here. Part 2 (weight prejudice and plot holes) is here.

I promised to reconsider the following:

Are her books unfeminist, fat-phobic, full of plot-holes and bad messages, "Calvinistic" in morality, unsatisfying in romance, and supportive of slavery?

Now come the really fun stuff: morals and romance! (I'm assuming that slavery-support can fit in under "messages and morals")

( Potter, I—that was very—gallant of you—but don’t you realize—? )

Phew. Enough of morality, now I can write about LOVE! And yes, of course I'm going to talk about "that" interview.

Part 4 is here.

J.K. Rowling ‏@jk_rowling 10h ago
All I've done so far this week is change three characters' genders and I still don't know whether their current genitalia are permanent.

This is a post I've been meaning to write for a little while and J.K. Rowling's tweet today is too good of a lead-in to miss. I'm using my Lockhart icon not to indicate that I'm using this post to toot my own horn (I mean, no more than every post has that ultimate purpose) but to reflect that it will include more than the usual recommended daily allowance of self-quoting from my past posts.


Ten years ago, I was interested in the formation of the critical assessment of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, which was beginning to emerge with the publication of the next-to-last book and in anticipation of the final book. I was curious about how (if at all) the discussions, jokes, memes, rants, and enthusiasms posted on the internet by us, the "original fans" of the series, would contribute to the future critical consensus. My opinion--possibly outrageously Lockhartian--was that we, the fandom, would have some effect. Here's how I put it in an essay I posted in the Scribbulus section of the Leaky Cauldron website:

while the critical consensus is bound to change and evolve over time, we--the original Harry Potter readers--are providing the starting point. We are bending the twig from which the tree of critical response will grow.

And in a discussion on my LJ with a fellow fan of more Slytherfen-ish sympathies, I said the following:

go_back_chief: I also think there are some weaknesses now, that will no doubt improve when she's written more; it's something you can notice from book to book sometimes, but we should remember that this is the only story she's written so far, even though it's six books.

angua9: I feel that I will be in a much better position to judge Rowling's strengths and weaknesses as a writer when (if) I have the opportunity to read other works by her. It isn't clear to me now which things are HP (or Harry, even), which things are due to the intended audience, and which things are Rowling. It seems to me that I can see improvements in her writing abilities so far (especially in the early ones), but there's not much she can do at this point to change or improve her initial vision.

And, of course, judging an unfinished work is always tricky.

Well, the work is no longer unfinished. And I have since read four other books written by J.K. Rowling, five if you count The Tales of Beedle the Bard. In addition, we know a fair amount about an upcoming movie (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them) scripted by her and an upcoming two-part stage play (The Cursed Child) created with her approval and collaboration.

So how about it then? What do we think now of the topics we were hotly debating in 2006 and 2007? Are her books unfeminist, fat-phobic, full of plot-holes and bad messages, "Calvinistic" in morality, unsatisfying in romance, and supportive of slavery? Or, more specifically, does our NEW information provide any resolution to our OLD debates?

Obviously, this discussion will involve some degree of spoilers for The Casual Vacancy and the Cormoran Strike books, but I will try not to say anything too revealing. I definitely won't reveal the identity of the murderer in the three mystery novels.

( I See You've All Bought a Complete Set of My Books--Well Done )

Well, this is plenty long for an LJ post and I've only covered my first subject (and the most interesting one to me), feminism. So the other subjects of debate will be covered in a subsequent post or posts.

https://medinger.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/for-fans-of-megan-whalen-turners-the-queens-thief-series/

For Fans of Megan Whalen Turner’s The Queen’s Thief Series….

…. a little bird told me the next two are in the home stretch of being finished and coming out some time in the not-too-far-off future. First the publisher will reissue the original four to bring a new generation of readers to them and then….numbers five and six. Excited moi? Just a bit.

It's been far too long!