the lilith alex dynamic is always interesting to read.
though i must say, i kind of feel increasingly like...props to Abraham for being the only adult in her life actually willing to give her some specific guidance as far as her extracurricular magical studies are concerned. I get that her teachers etc disapprove, but uh, I think its clear at this point she's going to do it anyway and given what she's already done on her own...i don't see how some adult guided advanced magical study could really be worse for her...
kind of how when dumbledore started working directly with harry in book six and was like, FINALLY, YES, PREPARE HIM, YOU ARE THE GREATEST WIZARD ALIVE AND HE IS DESTINED TO FIGHT VOLDEMORT YES YOU SHOULD GIVE HIM PRIVATE LESSONS...lol
“This new obsession of yours means you've probably found a new way to get yourself into trouble with a half-baked scheme, which means you are inevitably going to wind up in the Dean's office again before the end of the year.”
I am not so sure that AT sent those books. He already gave her that Obol to study and he also wouldn't be careless with letting someone else get hold of the books on their way to Alex, whether they had anything to do with dark magic or not. My best guess at the moment is Ms.Shirtliffe, but it could be someone else other than AT.
I can't believe Alex actually went to a teacher to ask for help with her whole Stars Above business, its so unlike her. Looks like she is maturing even more. She has matured quite a bit in this book.
Inverarity is really developing the notion of magical theory quite a lot, a lot more than JKR did in HP. I still wonder whether he imagines the powers to be akin of the Greek gods. As I already pointed out, that would be a very significant departure from the Potterverse, and depending on the interpretation, I am not sure I like it.
I already commented in the past how I don't feel the gay thing adds to the story. In fact, I consider it a significant achievement of Rowlings that she attenuated the sexuality in an all time best seller and managed to convey that love is really about commitment, rather that sexual arousal, which she very much deemphasized. Our society is allready way oversexualized and it's refreshing to see an author tell a story where sex plays a very small role, where family is more important than gratification of the senses, without abolishing the latter altogether. There is a reason why bedrooms are fitted with doors.
That said, in separate news, I wonder whether the following two quotes from AQ2 are intentional forward references, and whether the fight with Torvalds scene was already conceived at that time:
“Maybe you do,” Alexandra shot back. “Maybe you're a pervert like Martin!” Beside her, Anna gasped. [Perhaps inverarity wanted us to see Alexandra develop from calling Max and Martin perverts to breaking up with her date to defend them, or perhaps it was totally innocent, unconnected. Inverarity, please enlighten us.]
“I don't care if you've got a problem with me because of my father, or because you don't like girls,...
I've had a lot of things planned for a long time, but I generally prefer to let the reader decide What It All Means. :)
I have no intention of writing explicit sexual content, nor is this or any book going to become All About Shipping. However, Alexandra and her friends are (American) teenagers, and they're going to act like it, which means sex is certainly going to be on their minds.
Well, when Alexandra called Max and Martin perverts, she had no idea either of them were gay, she was referring to (what she believed was) Martin's flirting with much-younger Darla. But yes, I knew there would be gay characters in the future.
I already commented in the past how I don't feel the gay thing adds to the story. In fact, I consider it a significant achievement of Rowlings that she attenuated the sexuality in an all time best seller and managed to convey that love is really about commitment, rather that sexual arousal, which she very much deemphasized.
1) I don't see why you think "the gay thing" has any connection to whether commitment or sexuality is emphasized. Unless you think homosexual love is inherently sexual in a way heterosexual love isn't. But I'm sure you don't think that way.
2) With respect, "the gay thing" adds just as much to a story as "the straight thing" does, and if you mind the former more than the latter...well.
also, for me, the utter lack of sexual reference in JK rowling always bothered me. Not that I wanted explicit passages, but rather...the idea that a group of teenagers would NEVER think/talk about/reference actions around sex is... laughably unrealistic. And that in a group of teenagers as big as the student body of Hogwarts NOBODY would be referred to or even hinted at being anything but heterosexual and cisgendered? not. reflective. at. all. of. reality.
While it is unrealistic that teenagers would never think/talk about sex, I can forgive that more because you can always assume it happened off-page. Not having anyone be gay or transgendered outside of author interviews, though, is much less forgivable. (And don't get me started on race...)
I like the HP books, but they have more than their fair share of problematic elements, for sure.
I do not believe that two references over 4 books really constitutes a "thing". It isn't even big enough to qualify as a thingette, it barely passes muster as a thingino.
But a whingeino about the thingino: both outings taste of Author. Max/Martin seemed like a Take That to Jo: Mwah hah hah! I have outed a character in CANON. Likewise, Alex is going to indulge in hawt schoolgirl action was like Harry's Death March in DH. "I have no intention of writing explicit sexual content" so Readers already knew it wasn't gonna happen and the only question was how will the Author stop it happening?
Actually, I just don't think it adds to the story, because sex isn't central to this or the HP stories. They are about heroism, moral choices, especially in the face of popular opposition, and about the interplay between authority figures and gurus (DD was more of the latter, at least for Harry, and some other principals try that route, too).
re your second question, you seem to have missed on how I found it refreshing that JKR wrote a whole series where sexuality was very subdued, and that that allowed to explore other aspects of human nature which, admittedly, often get short changed nowadays.
I should add that while I didn't grow up in Britain, some of the schools I went to, at the high school level and beyond, did have what you might call Victorian values. So I find my own youth sooner back in the Potterverse than in some other YA fiction. DD as a guru is also something I experienced from my principals.
Well, I don't want to compare myself too much to Rowling (I'm already being accused of writing things as a "Take that, Jo!" :/), but I agree with shinygobonkers that Rowling's teenagers weren't very realistic. If you prefer a near-absence of any sexuality, I can respect that, but while I hope my stories also feature heroism, moral choices, and the role of authority figures, my characters are not going to be quite as chaste as Rowling's.
1) Just because an element isn't central to the series in question doesn't mean it shouldn't be there. If the things you cited are what the books are about, why do they have any romance at all--why aren't all the characters asexual? Probably because Rowling thought it would be absurdly unrealistic to not have romance in a story about kids and teenagers, and she was right (her inability to write romance well notwithstanding).
2) You seem to be implying that homosexuality is inherently sexual in a way heterosexuality isn't. Here's what I mean: you repeatedly talk about how Rowling's books are "subdued" about sexuality, but actually there's a lot of romance in them--Harry dates Cho and later Ginny; Ron dates Lavender and then Hermione (kinda), etc. Hell, half the sixth book was devoted to shipping, yet despite that the books still "deemphasize sexuality" to you.
There is actually very little romance in the AQ books. There was David/Angelique in Book 3, Alex/Payton and Alex/Torvald in this book, and that's pretty much it. And yet you think the books emphasize sexuality in a way the HP books don't, and (apparently) one of the reasons is because of "the gay thing."
Needless to say, the notion that gay people are sexual in a way straight people aren't is incredibly offensive on a wide variety of dimensions. I do not believe you think that, so I ask for an alternate explanation for what you've said up until now.
Is homosexuality inherently more sexual than heterosexuality? I never implied that. But disagree with absolute statements regarding the role of the lack of romance in the HP series. JKR created a space in which to explore values often overshadowed by sex. The Weasleys are a good example of a fiercely loyal family that then needs to grapple with Percy rising at the wrong time through the ministry and being oblivious to its moral failings. But JKR went further, depicting marriage as a covenant, totally deemphasizing the role of exploring sexuality, of love while it lasts, which is how she can come to a situation where high school sweethearts stay together.
You may not find it realistic, but there really are segments of society where the sexuality of the HP series is totally the reality. I know such places. While it may not be for everyone, it allows for questioning some current values, which is something literature lends itself to.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story? Max and Martin made total sense to me as fiercely loyal, ambitious friends, without regard to sexuality. By making them gay, we become unable to explore non-sexual friendship between males. And given how unimportant it still is for this story, yes, it feels like a take that Jo job.
I understand your interpretation, and like I keep saying, it's not for the author to tell readers how to read the story. But for what it's worth, your interpretation is not mine, and what you infer about my intentions isn't correct.
We can have a larger discussion about it once all of AQATSA is posted. :)
But JKR went further, depicting marriage as a covenant, totally deemphasizing the role of exploring sexuality, of love while it lasts, which is how she can come to a situation where high school sweethearts stay together.
Well, I would suggest this is a bad thing actually. Sexuality is important.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story? Max and Martin made total sense to me as fiercely loyal, ambitious friends, without regard to sexuality. By making them gay, we become unable to explore non-sexual friendship between males.
1) This argument is ridiculous. You are perfectly able to explore "non-sexual friendship between males"--just about every book, movie, and TV show has this. What about the people who want to explore homosexual love? That's much rarer in fiction right now. Or do they not count?
2) This is what I mean when I say you imply homosexuality is more sexual than heterosexuality. There was plenty of romance in Harry Potter, and yet you persist in saying it "deemphasized the role of pursuing sexuality." And yet just Martin mentioning being gay leads you to immediately think of sex? It is entirely possible (albeit unlikely) that Max and Martin never had sex. Why is the Max/Martin relationship sexual to you in a way that, say, the Harry/Ginny one isn't?
responding to your two numbered questions: 2) deemphasizing is relative. When you compare your average work of fiction, HP puts forward a very different set of values. Which brings me to your other question: 1) well, if you want to explore homosexual love, or, more to the point, how others react to homosexuality, then Inverarity is definitely providing a cogent way to do it. Based on one's value judgments, one may go the same or a different route. But as I had posted, I felt - for me and from my miopic perspective of what is really absent in literature and society nowadays - that one remarkable feauture of HP was that it provided a backdrop for a different set of much more traditional values and turned that into an exciting story. To keep millions and millions of YA reading, along with their parents, without feeling the need to rate it R, is in my opinion a great achievement. Hollywood has intentionally tried to push many boundaries to the point where, instead of reflecting society, it shapes society (take as a small example the acceptance of swearing, which was clearly very much impacted by Hollywood). JKR pushed in a different direction, which many others do, but JKR had an unparallelled success, thus impacting popular imagination. I liked that, a lot.
And the fact I find some of Hogwarts to correspond to my own experiences as a teenager - boarding school, with teachers and a principal that were more gurus than teachers, with all the social aspects surrounding that, made the HP series all the more pleasurable to read, for me, my spouse and now hopefully my kids.
In the AQ series, I found many of the same aspects, along with many idiosyncracies that are cute, interesting, or often more nuanced than HP. I often liked it, but sometimes it feels like certain scenes are tacked on because they almost must. The Max Martin post facto interpretation seems like that to me. Not central to the plot, until now not really woven in at all, really as if a book cannot be complete without a gay character and a desire to have Alexandra say what the author would likely want to say in the same situation.
And since what draws me to reading fantasy novels is really the fantasy part, here magic and how it impacts decisions, and since the major plot is Alexandra discovering Abraham Thorn's motives and in her still limited life deciding where she stands and how she gets where she needs or wants to go, I really want to read about that, with all the supporting scenes.
Now it could be that in future books, the gay theme will be much more woven into the fabric of the books. Then, we might even discover many different ways of reacting sensibly to encounter with homosexual love (Alex's is not the only sensible way to deal with it - Torvald was not necessarily bigoted, and there are X shades in between). But for now, it doesn't seem to fit seamlessly in the story.
That said, when rereading AQ2, I do find interesting forward references to many different plts. Read, for example, AT's first conversation with Alex, and you will see that he is made to very consciously choose his words so as to remain truthful without lying about Hecate. It's is not always clear if he is talking about Claudia or Hecate, intentional ambiguity - a stroke of genius, Inverarity.
Well, if the homosexuality seems tacked on and extraneous, I'll accept that as a flaw in my execution. There are lots of things I throw into AQ because they seem like good ideas to me, which is the license fan fiction writers have. A professional editor would no doubt chop a lot of my details and subplots if AQ were being published.
FWIW, though, I didn't sit down and say "AQ needs a message about homosexuality and diversity, so who shall I make gay?"
A professional editor would no doubt chop a lot of my details and subplots if AQ were being published.
It's so good, not much would change, and I'd be sorry for some of the material that would disappear (the descriptions in the Lands Below, for example, while tedious, really did contribute a lot to the mood that befits those scenes).
I find this discussion very interesting. I didn't feel that Inverarity tacked it on at all - while I didn't like it back when you revealed Max, it really Americanized the feel of the book to me.
I've worked with teenagers and let's face it, these are the topics that occupy their consciousness, and you do a great job describing the general craziness! My mother says - Teenagehood is the closest you get to psychosis. Alexandra's obsessions and hit and miss maturity level are a great parallel to many creative and talented kids who tend to take on too much. And I loved the scene where Alex described her dating life with Constance and Forbearance, you really got the dynamics perfectly, when there are a few "good" girls who, for whatever reason, are respected by the others and there's this urge to tempt them, but also to protect them.
Thanks for not getting too explicit, though... leave something for the meta-fanfiction.
(Tealterror - I plan to respond to your last comment on tomorrow's response thread.)
I think we just come from a fundamental different standpoint here. The "traditional values" that were infused in HP, which I agree are there, are IMO one of the series's greatest weaknesses. Maybe it's a function of my childhood, or my political views, but the lack of major non-white characters, the lack of any sexuality other than PG13-rated cisgendered straightness, the lack of many powerful female authority figures, and many more, are all weaknesses--huge ones.
However, aside from that--which we can't really argue about--I honestly do have an issue with you emphasizing "the gay theme." It's not a theme. A few characters are gay. That's reality. At the least, it takes u[ far less space than "the straight theme," but I have yet to hear you complain about that.
P.S.: Torvald was most certainly bigoted, whatever you think of Alex's reaction.
The Weasleys are a good example of a fiercely loyal family that then needs to grapple with Percy rising at the wrong time through the ministry and being oblivious to its moral failings.
It was also a situation of Percy being alienated from a family which (other than his mother) looked down at his quite real accomplishments and mocked him on a regular basis. When you turn it around and look at it, and several other situations, such as the post romance treatment of Cho, names like 'phelgn', etc there were more than one side to the story.
I would say Inverarity's accomplishment has been to depict a more nuanced world. Alexandra is not always right in her judgements the way Harry was. Would Harry, ever feel guilty or pay damages for destroying a muggle engine and furthermore, would JKR portray as something Harry should pay for? Can you picture Mrs. Shirtcliff rewarding Alexandra for wrapping a fellow student in a giant bugger like Slughorn did with Ginny?
The accomplishment of this series is how it looks at morality in a multidimensional manner.
But JKR went further, depicting marriage as a covenant, totally deemphasizing the role of exploring sexuality, of love while it lasts, which is how she can come to a situation where high school sweethearts stay together.
Truthfully, I don't think it was a noble choice on her part, rather a lack of skill. As for their being a great moral message? I think there were several cases where sex was implied (Ginny walking in on Percy/Penelope, after the Yule Ball).
You may not find it realistic, but there really are segments of society where the sexuality of the HP series is totally the reality. I know such places. While it may not be for everyone, it allows for questioning some current values, which is something literature lends itself to.
I am all for questioning values. Doing so had me running and desperately searching for better answers at a very young age, in part from places where the morality was very straight laced (When I think of Victorian, I think hypocritical, which I don't think you do).
Thing is, the school where Alexandra attends is not in that world, or rather, it's in a world several moralities, the Gemling Chu's, Alexandra's, the Seaburys, the Ozarkers, the Dinetah, Old Colonial etc (and I could go on) all meet, and don't always get along...rather like what you get in most High School and IRL.
The only place you get what you call the HP view is in communities that self segragate. Truthfully, can you tell me such places where it is not so? Inverarity does include such places (Ozarker, Dinetah), but they are, mostly, not where the action happens. So the story reflects this, as it should.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story?
Gays are part of the world and some people have gay friends and relatives. Alexandra happens to be one of them. Regardless, it shows part of who Alexandra is; basically someone who is rather open minded toward individual choices, but rather blind to cultural/artifical constraints, such as the C/F and the Rashes.
While think there's some truth to that, I also think the Dinetah have chosen to some extent self segregate due to that treatment. Evidence includes the lack of floo portals on the reservation.
"But JKR went further, depicting marriage as a covenant, totally deemphasizing the role of exploring sexuality, of love while it lasts, which is how she can come to a situation where high school sweethearts stay together.
Truthfully, I don't think it was a noble choice on her part, rather a lack of skill. "
I hated when the Phlegm/Bill wedding was set up as an Unbreakable Vow. WTF? Punish adultery with death? What message is Jo preaching? Stone adulteresses to death?
Or is she preaching Gryffindors rule and the Greater Good? Mwah hah hah, Wizards are superior to Humans: Wizards kill adulteresses with Magic which proves their moral superiority to inferior Muggles who have to use rocks like a phalange of monkeys.
Ha, ha, I think your last paragraph was exactly what Jo was saying. :) Are we sure that marriage is an Unbreakable Vow for wizards? I remember that the minister said, "then I declare you bonded for life" but I missed the fact that he waved his wand and made stars spiral around the couple until I looked it up just now. However, this is different from when Snape made an Unbreakable Vow in HBP; it says there that "they grasped right hands" and "a thin tongue of brilliant flame issued from the wand and wound its way around their hands like a red-hot wire" (p. 36). I have no complaints about how Jo depicted sexuality; the way she did it leaves room for the imagination but still allows younger readers to enjoy the books. I also like how you, Inverarity, portray the romantic parts of your books; it's entertaining without being distracting. The romances add humor and character development. Alex is a normal teenage girl who wants to experience everything in life. And I always thought Max being gay shed some light on his preocupation with his sisters making good marriages so that they would be accepted by wizarding society.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2012-04-23 01:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-23 03:03 pm (UTC)though i must say, i kind of feel increasingly like...props to Abraham for being the only adult in her life actually willing to give her some specific guidance as far as her extracurricular magical studies are concerned. I get that her teachers etc disapprove, but uh, I think its clear at this point she's going to do it anyway and given what she's already done on her own...i don't see how some adult guided advanced magical study could really be worse for her...
kind of how when dumbledore started working directly with harry in book six and was like, FINALLY, YES, PREPARE HIM, YOU ARE THE GREATEST WIZARD ALIVE AND HE IS DESTINED TO FIGHT VOLDEMORT YES YOU SHOULD GIVE HIM PRIVATE LESSONS...lol
no subject
Date: 2012-04-23 10:53 pm (UTC)“This new obsession of yours means you've probably found a new way to get yourself into trouble with a half-baked scheme, which means you are inevitably going to wind up in the Dean's office again before the end of the year.”
loL. Xactly and Perfectly true
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 02:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 04:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 02:23 am (UTC)I can't believe Alex actually went to a teacher to ask for help with her whole Stars Above business, its so unlike her. Looks like she is maturing even more. She has matured quite a bit in this book.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 07:08 am (UTC)I already commented in the past how I don't feel the gay thing adds to the story. In fact, I consider it a significant achievement of Rowlings that she attenuated the sexuality in an all time best seller and managed to convey that love is really about commitment, rather that sexual arousal, which she very much deemphasized. Our society is allready way oversexualized and it's refreshing to see an author tell a story where sex plays a very small role, where family is more important than gratification of the senses, without abolishing the latter altogether. There is a reason why bedrooms are fitted with doors.
That said, in separate news, I wonder whether the following two quotes from AQ2 are intentional forward references, and whether the fight with Torvalds scene was already conceived at that time:
“Maybe you do,” Alexandra shot back. “Maybe you're a pervert like Martin!” Beside her, Anna gasped. [Perhaps inverarity wanted us to see Alexandra develop from calling Max and Martin perverts to breaking up with her date to defend them, or perhaps it was totally innocent, unconnected. Inverarity, please enlighten us.]
“I don't care if you've got a problem with me because of my father, or because you don't like girls,...
So?
--Geneva
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 11:24 am (UTC)I have no intention of writing explicit sexual content, nor is this or any book going to become All About Shipping. However, Alexandra and her friends are (American) teenagers, and they're going to act like it, which means sex is certainly going to be on their minds.
Forward references?
Date: 2012-04-24 02:59 pm (UTC)--Geneva
Re: Forward references?
Date: 2012-04-25 01:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 12:24 pm (UTC)1) I don't see why you think "the gay thing" has any connection to whether commitment or sexuality is emphasized. Unless you think homosexual love is inherently sexual in a way heterosexual love isn't. But I'm sure you don't think that way.
2) With respect, "the gay thing" adds just as much to a story as "the straight thing" does, and if you mind the former more than the latter...well.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 12:51 pm (UTC)also, for me, the utter lack of sexual reference in JK rowling always bothered me. Not that I wanted explicit passages, but rather...the idea that a group of teenagers would NEVER think/talk about/reference actions around sex is... laughably unrealistic. And that in a group of teenagers as big as the student body of Hogwarts NOBODY would be referred to or even hinted at being anything but heterosexual and cisgendered? not. reflective. at. all. of. reality.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 01:39 pm (UTC)I like the HP books, but they have more than their fair share of problematic elements, for sure.
The gay thing?
Date: 2012-04-25 12:08 am (UTC)But a whingeino about the thingino: both outings taste of Author. Max/Martin seemed like a Take That to Jo: Mwah hah hah! I have outed a character in CANON. Likewise, Alex is going to indulge in hawt schoolgirl action was like Harry's Death March in DH. "I have no intention of writing explicit sexual content" so Readers already knew it wasn't gonna happen and the only question was how will the Author stop it happening?
Re: The gay thing?
Date: 2012-04-25 01:30 am (UTC)I don't see what "hawt schoolgirl action" has to do with Harry's Death March.
"No explicit sexual content" doesn't mean no one will ever have sex, just that I'm not going to describe it in NC-17 detail.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-24 02:57 pm (UTC)re your second question, you seem to have missed on how I found it refreshing that JKR wrote a whole series where sexuality was very subdued, and that that allowed to explore other aspects of human nature which, admittedly, often get short changed nowadays.
I should add that while I didn't grow up in Britain, some of the schools I went to, at the high school level and beyond, did have what you might call Victorian values. So I find my own youth sooner back in the Potterverse than in some other YA fiction. DD as a guru is also something I experienced from my principals.
--Geneva
no subject
Date: 2012-04-25 01:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-25 02:04 am (UTC)1) Just because an element isn't central to the series in question doesn't mean it shouldn't be there. If the things you cited are what the books are about, why do they have any romance at all--why aren't all the characters asexual? Probably because Rowling thought it would be absurdly unrealistic to not have romance in a story about kids and teenagers, and she was right (her inability to write romance well notwithstanding).
2) You seem to be implying that homosexuality is inherently sexual in a way heterosexuality isn't. Here's what I mean: you repeatedly talk about how Rowling's books are "subdued" about sexuality, but actually there's a lot of romance in them--Harry dates Cho and later Ginny; Ron dates Lavender and then Hermione (kinda), etc. Hell, half the sixth book was devoted to shipping, yet despite that the books still "deemphasize sexuality" to you.
There is actually very little romance in the AQ books. There was David/Angelique in Book 3, Alex/Payton and Alex/Torvald in this book, and that's pretty much it. And yet you think the books emphasize sexuality in a way the HP books don't, and (apparently) one of the reasons is because of "the gay thing."
Needless to say, the notion that gay people are sexual in a way straight people aren't is incredibly offensive on a wide variety of dimensions. I do not believe you think that, so I ask for an alternate explanation for what you've said up until now.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-25 05:11 am (UTC)You may not find it realistic, but there really are segments of society where the sexuality of the HP series is totally the reality. I know such places. While it may not be for everyone, it allows for questioning some current values, which is something literature lends itself to.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story? Max and Martin made total sense to me as fiercely loyal, ambitious friends, without regard to sexuality. By making them gay, we become unable to explore non-sexual friendship between males. And given how unimportant it still is for this story, yes, it feels like a take that Jo job.
--Geneva
no subject
Date: 2012-04-25 11:50 am (UTC)We can have a larger discussion about it once all of AQATSA is posted. :)
no subject
Date: 2012-04-25 02:05 pm (UTC)Well, I would suggest this is a bad thing actually. Sexuality is important.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story? Max and Martin made total sense to me as fiercely loyal, ambitious friends, without regard to sexuality. By making them gay, we become unable to explore non-sexual friendship between males.
1) This argument is ridiculous. You are perfectly able to explore "non-sexual friendship between males"--just about every book, movie, and TV show has this. What about the people who want to explore homosexual love? That's much rarer in fiction right now. Or do they not count?
2) This is what I mean when I say you imply homosexuality is more sexual than heterosexuality. There was plenty of romance in Harry Potter, and yet you persist in saying it "deemphasized the role of pursuing sexuality." And yet just Martin mentioning being gay leads you to immediately think of sex? It is entirely possible (albeit unlikely) that Max and Martin never had sex. Why is the Max/Martin relationship sexual to you in a way that, say, the Harry/Ginny one isn't?
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 11:49 am (UTC)2) deemphasizing is relative. When you compare your average work of fiction, HP puts forward a very different set of values. Which brings me to your other question:
1) well, if you want to explore homosexual love, or, more to the point, how others react to homosexuality, then Inverarity is definitely providing a cogent way to do it. Based on one's value judgments, one may go the same or a different route. But as I had posted, I felt - for me and from my miopic perspective of what is really absent in literature and society nowadays - that one remarkable feauture of HP was that it provided a backdrop for a different set of much more traditional values and turned that into an exciting story. To keep millions and millions of YA reading, along with their parents, without feeling the need to rate it R, is in my opinion a great achievement. Hollywood has intentionally tried to push many boundaries to the point where, instead of reflecting society, it shapes society (take as a small example the acceptance of swearing, which was clearly very much impacted by Hollywood). JKR pushed in a different direction, which many others do, but JKR had an unparallelled success, thus impacting popular imagination. I liked that, a lot.
And the fact I find some of Hogwarts to correspond to my own experiences as a teenager - boarding school, with teachers and a principal that were more gurus than teachers, with all the social aspects surrounding that, made the HP series all the more pleasurable to read, for me, my spouse and now hopefully my kids.
In the AQ series, I found many of the same aspects, along with many idiosyncracies that are cute, interesting, or often more nuanced than HP. I often liked it, but sometimes it feels like certain scenes are tacked on because they almost must. The Max Martin post facto interpretation seems like that to me. Not central to the plot, until now not really woven in at all, really as if a book cannot be complete without a gay character and a desire to have Alexandra say what the author would likely want to say in the same situation.
And since what draws me to reading fantasy novels is really the fantasy part, here magic and how it impacts decisions, and since the major plot is Alexandra discovering Abraham Thorn's motives and in her still limited life deciding where she stands and how she gets where she needs or wants to go, I really want to read about that, with all the supporting scenes.
Now it could be that in future books, the gay theme will be much more woven into the fabric of the books. Then, we might even discover many different ways of reacting sensibly to encounter with homosexual love (Alex's is not the only sensible way to deal with it - Torvald was not necessarily bigoted, and there are X shades in between). But for now, it doesn't seem to fit seamlessly in the story.
That said, when rereading AQ2, I do find interesting forward references to many different plts. Read, for example, AT's first conversation with Alex, and you will see that he is made to very consciously choose his words so as to remain truthful without lying about Hecate. It's is not always clear if he is talking about Claudia or Hecate, intentional ambiguity - a stroke of genius, Inverarity.
--Geneva
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 12:28 pm (UTC)FWIW, though, I didn't sit down and say "AQ needs a message about homosexuality and diversity, so who shall I make gay?"
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 01:55 pm (UTC)It's so good, not much would change, and I'd be sorry for some of the material that would disappear (the descriptions in the Lands Below, for example, while tedious, really did contribute a lot to the mood that befits those scenes).
--Geneva
Glad to hear that
Date: 2012-04-26 03:05 pm (UTC)I've worked with teenagers and let's face it, these are the topics that occupy their consciousness, and you do a great job describing the general craziness! My mother says - Teenagehood is the closest you get to psychosis. Alexandra's obsessions and hit and miss maturity level are a great parallel to many creative and talented kids who tend to take on too much. And I loved the scene where Alex described her dating life with Constance and Forbearance, you really got the dynamics perfectly, when there are a few "good" girls who, for whatever reason, are respected by the others and there's this urge to tempt them, but also to protect them.
Thanks for not getting too explicit, though... leave something for the meta-fanfiction.
(Tealterror - I plan to respond to your last comment on tomorrow's response thread.)
Re: Glad to hear that
Date: 2012-04-26 11:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 11:57 pm (UTC)However, aside from that--which we can't really argue about--I honestly do have an issue with you emphasizing "the gay theme." It's not a theme. A few characters are gay. That's reality. At the least, it takes u[ far less space than "the straight theme," but I have yet to hear you complain about that.
P.S.: Torvald was most certainly bigoted, whatever you think of Alex's reaction.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 04:58 am (UTC)It was also a situation of Percy being alienated from a family which (other than his mother) looked down at his quite real accomplishments and mocked him on a regular basis. When you turn it around and look at it, and several other situations, such as the post romance treatment of Cho, names like 'phelgn', etc there were more than one side to the story.
I would say Inverarity's accomplishment has been to depict a more nuanced world. Alexandra is not always right in her judgements the way Harry was. Would Harry, ever feel guilty or pay damages for destroying a muggle engine and furthermore, would JKR portray as something Harry should pay for? Can you picture Mrs. Shirtcliff rewarding Alexandra for wrapping a fellow student in a giant bugger like Slughorn did with Ginny?
The accomplishment of this series is how it looks at morality in a multidimensional manner.
But JKR went further, depicting marriage as a covenant, totally deemphasizing the role of exploring sexuality, of love while it lasts, which is how she can come to a situation where high school sweethearts stay together.
Truthfully, I don't think it was a noble choice on her part, rather a lack of skill. As for their being a great moral message? I think there were several cases where sex was implied (Ginny walking in on Percy/Penelope, after the Yule Ball).
You may not find it realistic, but there really are segments of society where the sexuality of the HP series is totally the reality. I know such places. While it may not be for everyone, it allows for questioning some current values, which is something literature lends itself to.
I am all for questioning values. Doing so had me running and desperately searching for better answers at a very young age, in part from places where the morality was very straight laced (When I think of Victorian, I think hypocritical, which I don't think you do).
Thing is, the school where Alexandra attends is not in that world, or rather, it's in a world several moralities, the Gemling Chu's, Alexandra's, the Seaburys, the Ozarkers, the Dinetah, Old Colonial etc (and I could go on) all meet, and don't always get along...rather like what you get in most High School and IRL.
The only place you get what you call the HP view is in communities that self segragate. Truthfully, can you tell me such places where it is not so? Inverarity does include such places (Ozarker, Dinetah), but they are, mostly, not where the action happens. So the story reflects this, as it should.
Oh, and why I don't think the gay aspect belongs in this story?
Gays are part of the world and some people have gay friends and relatives. Alexandra happens to be one of them.
Regardless, it shows part of who Alexandra is; basically someone who is rather open minded toward individual choices, but rather blind to cultural/artifical constraints, such as the C/F and the Rashes.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 05:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 11:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 08:49 pm (UTC)Truthfully, I don't think it was a noble choice on her part, rather a lack of skill. "
I hated when the Phlegm/Bill wedding was set up as an Unbreakable Vow. WTF? Punish adultery with death? What message is Jo preaching? Stone adulteresses to death?
Or is she preaching Gryffindors rule and the Greater Good? Mwah hah hah, Wizards are superior to Humans: Wizards kill adulteresses with Magic which proves their moral superiority to inferior Muggles who have to use rocks like a phalange of monkeys.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 11:31 pm (UTC)Are we sure that marriage is an Unbreakable Vow for wizards? I remember that the minister said, "then I declare you bonded for life" but I missed the fact that he waved his wand and made stars spiral around the couple until I looked it up just now. However, this is different from when Snape made an Unbreakable Vow in HBP; it says there that "they grasped right hands" and "a thin tongue of brilliant flame issued from the wand and wound its way around their hands like a red-hot wire" (p. 36).
I have no complaints about how Jo depicted sexuality; the way she did it leaves room for the imagination but still allows younger readers to enjoy the books.
I also like how you, Inverarity, portray the romantic parts of your books; it's entertaining without being distracting. The romances add humor and character development. Alex is a normal teenage girl who wants to experience everything in life. And I always thought Max being gay shed some light on his preocupation with his sisters making good marriages so that they would be accepted by wizarding society.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-26 11:35 pm (UTC)