That was a good article, and particularly true. Harry is completely the same throughout the whole series. You know that pretty much no matter what happens he's going to whine about it. With Snape though, you've got a complete contradiction and he's so fascinating to study.
Snape is arguably one of the only three-dimensional characters in the book, except for maybe Dumbledore, who we saw had some serious troubles when he was younger, though it wasn't explored in depth until this book.
In essence, Rowling intended to create someone to despise, cuz she didn't like him, but she ended up creating someone who transcended her novel -- a living, 3D character that has SO much appeal because of that. I find it fascinating as well...
Good article! Though I would argue the point of a story isn't always necessarily to watch the main character's journey, I definitely agree Harry is lacking in the dynamics department. Still, I've known for a long time that the story is more about all of the characters than just Harry Potter (Harry's not even in the top ten of my favorite characters). The series is almost a parody of the epic of unfaltering good and evil; in the background, we see all the shades of grey, and they affect the story more than the two opposing powers realize. I'd like to thing Rowling did it on purpose, but perhaps she didn't. Ironically, "Harry Potter" isn't so much about Harry but about his entire world.
In the end, the biggest message I took away from the story was of subjectivity and the moral ambiguity of everyone-- Snape, Dumbledore, Regulus, Draco, and Percy, for examples-- everyone except Harry and Voldemort! (and maybe like Bellatrix and a few folks we didn't see too much of . . . ).
I still believe there was some change there in Snape, a path of moral growth was visible - cf. first and last scene with Dambledore in Snape's memories: from the pure fixation on Lily to unwillingness to kill and see people (and Harry) die. But definetely not enough. Which on the other hand keeps Snape snape'ish till the end (i.e. he's not transformed into an angel thank goodness))).
Comments 4
Reply
In essence, Rowling intended to create someone to despise, cuz she didn't like him, but she ended up creating someone who transcended her novel -- a living, 3D character that has SO much appeal because of that. I find it fascinating as well...
Reply
In the end, the biggest message I took away from the story was of subjectivity and the moral ambiguity of everyone-- Snape, Dumbledore, Regulus, Draco, and Percy, for examples-- everyone except Harry and Voldemort! (and maybe like Bellatrix and a few folks we didn't see too much of . . . ).
Reply
But all in the whole she's right.
Reply
Leave a comment