The Advance Guard
chapter three of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Harry writes to his friends for answers, but receives none – until a huge group of wizards, including Moody, Lupin, and Tonks, arrives unexpectedly and flies him to London.
His heart shot upward into his throat. There were people standing in the shadowy hall below.
(by Sayurikemiko)
A wand tip flared, illuminating the hall with magical light. Harry blinked. The people below were crowded around the foot of the stairs, gazing intently up at him, some craning their heads for a better look.
(by Leela Starsky)
Remus Lupin stood nearest to him. Though still quite young, Lupin looked tired and rather ill; …. Nevertheless, he was smiling broadly at Harry.
(by LMRourke)
Harry could hardly believe this was real. Four weeks with nothing, not the tiniest hint of a plan to remove him from Privet Drive, and suddenly a whole bunch of wizards were standing matter-of-factly in the house as though this were a long-standing arrangement.
(by MartinTenbones)
“You’re an Auror?” said Harry, impressed.
“Yeah,” said Tonks, looking proud…. “I only qualified a year ago.”
(by Michael Greenholt)
“If one of us is killed, the others keep flying, don’t stop, don’t break ranks. If they take out all of us and you survive, Harry, the rear guard are standing by to take over; keep flying east and they’ll join you.”
(by TBranch)
about the chapter
We first heard of Animagi in book one, and of Polyjuice Potion in book two. Both methods of magical concealment seemed innocuous at the time, and if anything rather amusing; but by books three and four, these two bits of magic became the big secrets behind the stories’ plots. So when Tonks hit the scene in this chapter, introducing us to the concept of a Metamorphmagus, I assumed right away (and I wasn’t alone) that we needed to start keeping our eyes out for another one, perhaps using these natural-born skills for less noble means. It never transpired, of course, but I can’t help wondering if Rowling once had further plans for this particular talent.
Something You May Not Have Noticed
I don’t know how Tonks knew enough about the Dursleys to know that an “All-England Best-Kept Suburban Lawn Competition” would lure them away (with Uncle Vernon “wearing his best suit and an expression of enormous smugness!”), but it was certainly brilliant. Especially because, just a few days previously, we learned that England is in the midst of a draught – complete with a hosepipe ban. So the best-kept lawn competition, if it actually existed, would be a gathering of people who openly flaunt rules for the sake of their own vanity. Right up the Dursleys’ alley. Maybe the government should have sponsored a real version of this event, so they could dole out fines to the nominees once they arrived.
The Wizarding World
After Mad-Eye Moody chastises Harry for keeping his wand in his back jeans pocket, he grumbles about how “nobody bothers anymore” about “elementary wand safety.” It’s funny, because during Harry’s first year at Hogwarts, we never heard once about this idea – yet it seems that wand safety must have been covered somewhere. But in which class? And what else, exactly, does it entail? I can’t for the life of me come up with an idea of what a course like this might look like.
Oops
One thing Rowling never seemed to quite think all the way through was the means of transport her characters take over the course of the series. Just as Hagrid “flew” to the hut-on-the-rock in book one but had no means of doing so, we’re now given a rather ho-hum explanation that Harry is too young to Apparate out of Privet Drive, while a year from now he will pair with an adult to do just that. And wouldn’t Side-Along-Apparition have been preferable to Arthur Weasley’s blowing out the Dursleys’ chimney the previous year, which he said then was the “only way?” It’s something that just never seems to have been thought through – which, for Rowling, is an extreme rarity.
Something to Remember
Lots of wizards in the Advance Guard seem familiar with James and Lily, despite not having had any reason (that we know of) to cross paths with them. Both Kingsley Shacklebolt and Elphias Doge, for instance, make the classic comparison between Harry and his parents – “his dad’s looks but his mother’s eyes.” James and Lily were only a couple of years out of Hogwarts when they were killed; why would older wizards like these guys have known them so well?
As to how Tonks knew that winning that particular competition or sweepstakes would really get at the Dursleys…later in the book it is made clear that Harry’s neighborhood has always been closely watched, for pretty obvious reasons. This itself would probably lend the Ministry some clues as to the sort of people who live in the homes there- after all, the neighbors have always seemed to be very much like the Dursleys. If the Ministry did have this kind of information, Tonks works for the Ministry (as an Auror) and therefore it would probably be available to her.
If this explanation is to be accepted, it does raise concerns about the concept of privacy and the role of the government in the Wizarding World!
Jessi said this on October 19, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Tonks as a whole is probably the most disappointing character of the series. Not for the Metamorphmagus thing (though I too bought into that and spent quite a bit of time assuring everyone who woudl listen that in DH we’ll meet Andromeda, who will also be a Metamorphmagus and be instrumental to everything). It’s just that Tonks was so cool in OotP – a strong and snarky female, a member of the Order but young enough to sympathize with Harry’s generation better, a duelist powerful enough to challenge Bellatrix…and then she falls in love with Lupin, and that’s her whole role in the series. *sigh* [Voldemort voice] I confess myself…disappointed! [/Voldemort voice] Still, I have my Tonks outfit ready for Halloween – her hair makes her the perfect character for cosplay!
hpboy13 said this on October 20, 2009 at 1:13 am
Jessi – an interesting idea; we DO know that Dumbledore is keeping a pretty close watch on Harry, so perhaps he made the suggestion to Tonks?
hpboy13 – I completely agree. It’s frustrating that Rowling’s ideas of strong female characters are Hermione (who melts under pressure until the last few chapters of DH), Molly (a housewife who falls apart with a boggart, though she does produce one cool spell against Bellatrix), and Tonks, who as you mentioned, is the only female Auror we know but is completely dismantled when she falls in love. There are dozens of males that are stronger than her strongest female, and it’s definitely one of the biggest weaknesses/problems with the books.
John Kearns said this on October 20, 2009 at 9:13 am
Tonks’ letdown as a character aside, I respectfully disagree with the idea that Rowling’s females are weak, or weaker than her males. I think the idea of a “strong woman” has become something strange in popular culture… someone almost one-dimensional who can never display any facet of weakness. I’m actually very pleased Rowling doesn’t succumb to this idea. All of the characters have major flaws, and to create a ‘strong female’ character would be to airbrush those human flaws. Molly does fall apart once (the boggart), after which she quickly recovers and assures everyone she’s “being silly,” as though she herself believes that expressing her fears is weak. Hermione does give under pressure, but after being the practical one of the trio for almost seven books. It would be unrealistic for her not to falter occasionally.
What male character doesn’t have such weaknesses? Ron carries a defeatist, cynical attitude with him off and on for most of the books. Harry certainly spends enough of the series making emotion-based mistakes. Draco can scarcely handle the weight of his responsibility in book 6 and breaks down crying (not that anyone was arguing he was a strong character;) ). Arthur Weasley is generally mild and submissive (in fact, while Molly offs Bellatrix, all Arthur gets is a punch at Lucius). Dumbledore could be argued as a strong male character, and so could Snape (if you disregard his Molly-like moment when he finds Lily’s picture), and Sirius (though he completely cracks upon learning his best friend is dead).
I honestly don’t see a difference in female vs. male weakness in the HP characters. I don’t see Tonks as being dismantled when she falls in love with Lupin. She’s still capable as an auror, she just never does anything truly exciting. But being in love doesn’t have to do with her lack of heroism, as even motherhood doesn’t keep her from joining in the fray.
Incidentally, hpboy, my Tonks Halloween costume is nearly done. ;)
Inky Squirrel said this on October 20, 2009 at 10:47 am
Inky Squirrel: Wow, you said it way better than I ever could.
Rowling wasn’t trying to create mini-Supermen–she wanted her characters to feel real and, since no one is perfect and everyone is learning and growing, these characters are some of my favorites. Even looking at moments like CAPSLock!Harry make me laugh because when did *I* or my friends skip the annoying teenage years? We didn’t.
Natalia said this on October 20, 2009 at 11:16 am
Inky Squirrel, thanks for your thoughtful comment – I’m actually really glad you disagree with me, because my impression of the females in the books has always bothered me. It’s definitely a good thing if it’s not shared by everyone. :)
I definitely agree that it’s a plus that all of Rowling’s characters are flawed – that’s a huge part of what makes them so appealing! I think what irks me a little bit is the feeling I get sometimes that all the females tend to be flawed in the same (stereotypical) way, which is to say a lack of strength/toughness. I don’t think I can agree with your statement that Tonks doesn’t melt down – you say she’s able to keep doing her job, but we don’t ever see how well she performs it, either before or after her change. What we do see is that her Patronus changes, she loses her ability to Metamorph(?), and she’s downright depressed every time Harry sees her. I’ve never known anybody in real life to lose their personality that dramatically for that long just because someone won’t date them. Meanwhile, while Molly and Hermione both come through in the end, I would say that it was a big question mark heading into the final book whether they would be able to.
There are certainly male characters who are flawed in this same way – look at Fudge, or Quirrell! But aside from perhaps McGonagall (whose personality we never fully see, because of her role as a teacher), and I suppose Umbridge and Bellatrix, I wouldn’t say we have any major female characters who DON’T struggle with it. I’m wouldn’t want a dramatic/unrealistic change in all the female characters; I just want one who stays as tough as Dumbledore, or Sirius, or Moody, or Kingsley, or even Scrimgeour. Even bringing McGonagall into a more relevant role in the Order, so that we see another side of her, could have done it. After book five I thought Tonks was filling that role, and I was really disappointed when she flopped in the following book.
John Kearns said this on October 20, 2009 at 11:29 am
Inky Squirrel and Natalia- I agree and can’t word it nearly as well, you’ve said all I’d like to.
John- what about Luna? I’d say she was pretty tough, she certaily isn’t fazed much by the multitudes of students that bullied her throughout school or being stuck in the Malfoy Mannor with a half dead wandmaker and Voldemort living somewhere above her.
I always figured Mrs Figg had ideas of how much appearences and such mean to the Dursleys (Petunia might as well be Mrs Bucket) and passed that on to the Order.
Jess said this on October 20, 2009 at 2:42 pm
hi again, can I just add that I think it would be more of a flaw in Molly’s character if we didn’t see that she was worried about her family in some way. Especially after the whole Ginny and the Chamber of Secrets episode/ her brothers dying in the first war. She does have reason to fall apart at seeing her sons dead on the floor and I see as less of a weakness as just the circumstances and that she finally cracked, as anyone else would.
Jess said this on October 20, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Ha ha, I can see I’m quickly being overruled here. Which I’m glad about. :) And Jess – yes, I somehow managed to completely forget about Luna! Obviously. Whoops.
In terms of your comment on Molly – if “anyone else” would crack under those circumstances, then why don’t we ever see it happen to Arthur? And why does Narcissa crack far more than Lucius? My point isn’t that these types of weaknesses are unreasonable, it’s just that they’re ascribed to all of the women, which is what I’m uncomfortable with. Does that make sense?
John Kearns said this on October 20, 2009 at 3:33 pm
John: I don’t see these women caring about their husbands and children as weak. After all, women are often called the “nurturing sex” which, in my own life experience, is true and not something to feel ashamed/bad/or anything negative about. While I know my dad cares about me and my siblings, it’s my mother that dotes on us. :D
And, while we’re thinking of examples of women who don’t “crack” (**spoilers!**) let’s throw Neville’s grandmother in there–she stood up to the Ministry officials, went on the lam, and even showed up at Hogwarts during the final battle.
(And my opinion about the Lucius/Narcissa thing (**spoilers again!**): Narcissa was STRONG enough to be willing to defy and lie to Voldemort–a great, evil wizard–for a chance to find and care for her son. Lucius was either complacent or fearful enough to just keep his mouth shut (which may or may not be due to his character or the fact that Azkaban/having Voldie as a roommate broke him).)
Natalia said this on October 20, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Oh my, I’ve started quite the kettle of worms here, haven’t I? My views are that while Rowling has many strong female characters, I expected many more. It’s just that whenever a really powerful/cool female appears, two books later she’s totally lame.
I already gave Tonks as an example. In Book 5, she had a decent role and we expected great things. In HBP, she mopes around a bit, fusses over Lupin, and mopes more. In DH, she gets married, gets pregnant, disappears for the remainder of the book, appears at the battle, rushes off after Lupin, and ends up dead. Whatever happened to the badass Auror who was supposed to kick some Death Eater tushy?
Then there’s Fleur Delacour. In GoF, we’re presented originally with a selfish Barbie. As the book wears on, we see that Fleur is quite the capable witch (as Triwizard Champion), though note that she’s always lagging behind all the male champions. We then hear that she’ll stay in England, and we all have high hopes for Fleur to be a powerful member of the Order, a liason to the French wizards, and for her to lead a bunch of French wizards into battle in DH. Instead, she returns in HBP as everyone’s nightmare daughter-in-law, and then becomes a housewife for DH. Who could imagine the Triwizard Champion of Book 4 wearing aprons and cooking in DH?
And then there’s Ginny. In OotP, we see a Ginny who’s powerful, sassy, and independent. We finally think that she’s more than an annoying little sister, and we’re totally rooting for Harry to finally notice her. In HBP, he does. In DH, Ginny is to be kept firmly out of harm’s way, and is kept out of the Battle of Hogwarts because she’s “underage” – yet is almost seventeen, showed herself mroe than capable at 2 previous battles, and is likely older than Luna who’s allowed to go. Between these three women, we could have had a trio of femme fatales and expected just that after OotP, and wer eincredibly disappointed in the last two books.
That’s not to say that there aren’t strong females in the books. One just has to look at Narcissa (who stands up to Voldemort), Hermione (who saves Harry more times than I can count), McGonagall (who totally shows up Snape and then holds her own against VOLDY himself), Molly (who kills Bellatrix and raises seven Weasleys – brave woman!), and my favorite Luna. But the only females who are truly powerful and strong (not strong of character or morality) are Umbridge and Bellatrix. The message I get from the books is that good women can’t be powerful. So, on the whole, the females in HP do disappoint somewhat.
hpboy13 said this on October 20, 2009 at 5:39 pm
What a great discussion! Very thoughtful and insightful comments from everyone. One more “strong female” that seems to have been left out: Ginny. She plays an important part in the series and in Harry’s life by being in many ways a counter-balancing force to the other “strong female”: Hermione.
(And as a side note: Madam Hooch, Prof. Grubbly-Plank, Alecto Carrow, Madame Maxime, the strong female presence on the Gryffindor Quidditch team especially Angelina Johnson, repeated references to Gwenog Jones… the list goes on)
I realize that the characters I mentioned above are far from being center-stage, but they serve to flush out an image of the Wizarding World where woman play a significant part.
Ben said this on October 20, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Hi – just feel compelled to add something to the debate:
I agree with Inky Squirrel (thank you!) and Natalia, and want to add that the reason why Molly and Tonks are seen to be weak is because they are worried about the people they care for. Shall I call this ability to worry and cry sometimes, their “ability to love”? shall I mention that there’s a rather nasty character in the HP books who thinks love is a weakness? Hm…
I’d also like to say something about different types of toughness – the men cited as tough here, like Dumbledore and Sirius and Moody and Snape, are all merely acting tough – they can fight in a battle and pretend not to cry but they are scared and flawed by their experiences and JKR shows this. Their weakness is what makes them real, to me at least, and what makes me like them and want to read more about them. With the female characters – I agree to an extent in that they are less present, in some way, with the exception of Hermione, or less important or interested to Harry and therefore we just don’t get to see them. But I really don’t see them as less tough, or less flawed, or more so, than the male characters. Hermione regularly bursts into tears or says she’s afraid of doing something, but she does it anyway and never ever chickens out. Has anyone mentioned Ginny yet? She strikes me as tough. The McGonagall/Umbridge cat-fight later in Book 5 is an amusing testament of toughness on the part of both women, I’d say. Maybe we are looking for toughness in different places.
TomScribble said this on October 20, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Oops. I guess I posted my comment before reading the last one before it where Ginny was mentioned. But a question for hpboy13: You say there are no “truly powerful and strong” female characters who are good. Are there any “truly powerful and strong” male characters that are good either? I would say no. Or rather, I would say that I think Rowling is showing us that to be “truly powerful and strong” at the exclusion of any personal faults is impossible for men or women, wizards or Muggles.
Ben said this on October 20, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Hear hear.
Natalia said this on October 20, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Ben, well put.
I’m glad to read the views on Narcissa, as I’ve not yet decided for myself whether she’s just a fragile rich girl, or one of the gutsiest characters in the HP world. I’m sure it’ll come up again in the DH chapters.
Inky Squirrel said this on October 20, 2009 at 7:01 pm
Ben, there are many powerful and strong male characters who are good – one coming to mind is Albus Dumbledore, but there’s also Snape (let’s call him good for all intents and purposes), Moody, even Harry’s quite powerful. I’m not saying powerful and flawless, just that it’s be nice to have some formidable females fighting alongside Harry (ooh, I just realized that was a delightful alliteration!). Why couldn’t we have some female Order members at the end fighting instead of just Molly killing Bellatrix and Tonks dying. Why are so many male Order members important to the plot (Kingsley, Moody, Lupin, etc) whereas Emmeline Vance gets a passing mention that she was murdered (we don’t know how), Hestia Jones is babysitting the Dursleys, and Tonks mopes for a year, then disappears for a year only to die chasing after Lupin?
In regards to your point about the female characters – to be sure, women are a presence in the wizarding world – we’ve had female Ministers, Headmistresses, etc. But the ones you mentioned all play so minor a role, I can’t see how they’re relevant to the topic.
Inky Squirrel, I agree that Narcissa is intriguing, and I choose to view her as what strong females SHOULD be. She cares about her family and gets really emotional, but she won’t sit back and cry over Draco and Lucius. No, she’ll defy Voldy and Bella to go to Snape, she’ll try to protect her son, she even lies to Voldemort! If nothing else, that shows she’s a master Occlumens! I think Narcissa Malfoy is one of Jo’s triumphs.
hpboy13 said this on October 21, 2009 at 12:19 am
hpboy13, I see your point, and I partially agree with it. I think one of the things that Rowling does so well – and it’s one of the reasons the books are so appealing – is to make her fantastical world have a strong foundation in reality, in a world we can relate to. Just as the racial, socio-economic, religious and cultural make-up of the Hogwarts student body reflects the actual population of Britain (there’s a nice essay on the HP Lexicon about this), the gender proportions in Wizarding law-enforcement resemble those in the Muggle world. Rather than use the books as a medium to show an ideal or equitable society, Rowling replicates tendencies in the real world – including all the flaws and shortcomings – to tell a better story.
Ben said this on October 21, 2009 at 1:59 am
hpboy, I have to disagree with you, especially on Ginny. You say she isn’t a strong character because she is not allowed to be in the battle in DH. However, being strong, and not being allowed are two different matters. Ginny has proven (with Luna and Neville) to be strong enough to endure tortures for leading Dumbledore’s Army in DH. That she isn’t allowed for the battle at the end was not her own decision: it was that of Molly and partly Harry’s and she barely listened to it. She is held down by the stereotype thinking that others think of her, not by her own flaws or weakness.
I actually think Ginny is a very strong woman, especially since we see her grow so much during the books: from shy little girl to a fierce, sassy woman.
And Maybe I overlooked it (since there are now so many comments :P) but I also haven’t found a good reason why Luna isn’t a strong character.
Oh, and John, you wondered somewhere in the comments why we do see Molly crack and we don’t see that with Arthur. Isn’t the fact that Arthur gets pushed around by Molly (in sort of a funny way) enough for being a bit weak? He actually cowered to tell his wife about the candy the twins gave Dudley in book 4 and all his electronic stuff he collects aren’t allowed in the house, but in his own personal hidingplace, the shack nearby. Don’t get me wrong, I love Arthur, but the fact that he doesn’t crack down in front of us, doesn’t mean he’s also not weak….
kim said this on October 21, 2009 at 6:20 am
Haha, such a lively discussion! Thanks to everyone for maintaining respect – I got up this morning and saw all the new comments and thought, “uh oh…” but I underestimated my readership. :)
I love this also because every comment I read, I think, “they’re right!” and then I read the next one and it’s “oh yeah, but that’s also true….” So clearly the “problem” is not as big as I had once thought, and I’m glad to be shown otherwise.
I guess what I was looking at when I said I was disappointed in the females was more a general big picture than anything else. In 199 chapters, there are plenty of examples and counter-examples of both genders acting “strong” and “weak,” and plenty of arguments to be had (clearly ;) ) about how to even define those terms. I wonder, if there were some way to objectively tally up moments of strength for each gender, which would win – and whether it would (or should be) an accurate reflection of our world. The message IS clearly sent that being a housewife does NOT mean you are weak, which is absolutely a positive. Molly finishing off Bellatrix was pretty darn cool. But I think that Rowling also had a lot of opportunities to show females being equal to males that she could have taken without making the story less believable, and she didn’t take them. Fleur comes off by far the worst in the Triwizard Tournament (despite being three years older than Harry!); I’ve already discussed Tonks’s response to Lupin; and many strong characters we do see, like McGonagall, aren’t fully developed. Of course there are counterexamples here too, like Hermione, Luna, etc. And the more I think about it, the more I realize this is LESS of a problem for the younger generation – which is perhaps an accurate reflection of the real world, as Ginny, Hermione, and Luna all apparently continue with careers once they’re grown, including jobs traditionally held by males.
I should also just add that I’m a dad who stays home with my son during the days and works part-time on the side, while my wife works full-time. So it’s certainly plausible that I’m only even viewing this as an issue at all because I’m looking through the nontraditional/progressive/whatever-you-want-to-call-it lens of my experience. The females in the story could legitimately seem weak to me and still be strong compared to society’s general perception of them, if that makes sense.
John Kearns said this on October 21, 2009 at 11:36 am
It’s true that we see Molly break down, but not Arthur, but it’s also true that we see a little more of her as a character. She’s Harry’s replacement mother, in a way, where as Arthur is, although lovely, less of a replacement father than say, Sirius. So, perhaps it is more important for us to see her with the boggart, as it shows her seeing Harry getting killed too.
Also, let’s not forget Sirius’ breakdowns in OotP. For example, when he calls Harry ‘James’. That’s a wonderful example of a male charater falling apart. An even better one, would be Ron, where he storms off in DH.
Frankly, the women seem stronger throughout. The men seem to make frequent mistakes or have problems, such as Ron’s jealousy, Dumbledore keeping secrets, and Snape, who still mourns for Lilly. The women only seem to have one particularly bad moment, then it’s back to business as usual. Molly pulls herself together and gets on with it, Hermione does the same, and Tonks’ problem is resolved. JKR was a single mother with clinical depression. She would’ve had to have pulled herself together and pushed her problems to one side for the sake of her kid. This is mirrored in the books, as the women all seem to put their problems to one side for the sake of a loved one (except, perhaps, Tonks). The men, however, seem to have problems BECAUSE they love someone. Dumbledore, Snape, and yes, even Harry. All the characters are flawed. That’s what makes them so compelling.
Lizzie said this on October 21, 2009 at 3:28 pm
John, I agree, this debate is so much fun! And everyone has really good points.
kim, I see what you mena about Ginny. I dunno if I made this distinction (I guess not), but I was using her as an example of how we got short-changed to having a female have an integral role, a powerful moment, etc. Ginny is an awesome character, and it’s no wonder Harry likes her and many other guys do too, so I felt really frustrated when I didn’t see her throwing Bat-Bogey Hexes at the DEs.
And you will never EVER hear me say a bad word about Luna. She’s absolutely perfect as is. :D
hpboy13 said this on October 21, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Wow. This a really good discussion. Most of what I would have said has probably already been said, but I’ll try and be original. If I repeat something, sorry, I did read all the posts, but I may have forgotten some tiny details along the way.
I don’t think the books lack strong women. And perhaps more importantly, there are plenty of “weaker” men. Yes, Tonks becomes a bit dull in HBP, but Snape had the same thing happen to him, and he didn’t cope any better. Molly did break down when she saw the boggart, but it is comparable to the nervous breakdown Remus had at Grimmauld Place worrying about his unborn child (I seem to recall chairs being kicked over and hair being ripped out)? Both Merope and Dumbledore did foolish things for love, and while Dumbledore was able to change, did he really suffer from his decision less? Sure, Hermione had trouble coping when Ron left, but the Horcrux reveals a side to Ron that is just as vulnerable. Everything Sirius does is fueled by his emotions, and he’s just as hot headed as Ginny. I could go on, but I think you get what I’m saying. The males are in no way perfect or immune to having emotional problems, and they get them as frequently as the girls do. Plenty of the male characters have cried, in fact, it is hard to think of one who hasn’t.
Were the male characters all strong and totally capable of holding it together, and the females weren’t, then I’d say it was sexist. But everyone is flawed, both male and female,and so as long as that is distributed evenly, I don’t think it’s an issue. Equality is key.
Riley said this on October 21, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Riley, I’m not saying the women shouldn’t have emotional problems and shouldn’t succumb to emotions sometimes. The guys in the series are just as emotionally unstable, if nto mroe so, than the girls (as you pointed out). It’s just that when guys get emotional, exciting things happen. When Tonks gets emotional, she loses all liveliness and just acts bland, and then just disappears for DH.
hpboy13 said this on October 21, 2009 at 11:47 pm
glad we agree on Luna, HP-boy! I have to say, I hated it too when Ginny wasn’t shown in action in DH. I just kept disagreeing with my book. Anyway, I think John says it all in his last comment: the women aren’t exactly weak, but they don’t break down in the potteruniverse the same way as the men do.
Just one little comment, John: Is it really that surprising that Harry did better than Fleur in the Triwizard Tournament? I mean, he got a little help…..
Oh, I just started wondering about this: Is it a coincidence that Mad-eye starts talking about people dying when they get him from the Durseleys? Maybe some forboding for what’s about to come in DH?
x-kim-x
kim said this on October 22, 2009 at 7:29 am
kim – haha, I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised that Harry came out better than Fleur in the tournament (it’s his name on the cover, after all). But Fleur definitely had help too, and I mean seriously, she couldn’t take on a couple of grindylows? I realize she needed to not get to her sister for the plot, but then she was also the first one down in the maze – she just came out looking incredibly inferior in all three tasks, which I thought was unnecessary.
I like hpboy13′s last two points, too. Lupin has a moment of weakness; Tonks has a year of it. Ron shows weakness through the locket but then immediately overcomes it and destroys the horcrux; Hermione is all but nonfunctional for weeks after he leaves. We could have seen McGonagall being awesome working with the Order, could have seen Ginny being awesome in the battle (or anywhere in book seven, really…), and it’s just not there. You all have definitely convinced me that it’s not nearly so black or white as I originally made the issue out to be; I’m just left wanting a tiny bit more at the end. Luna DEFINITELY helps, though.
Oh, and kim, as far as Moody goes… there are certainly death omens in the books, but I don’t know if I’d call this one of them. I mean, is there ever a time that Moody DOESN’T talk about death? ;)
John Kearns said this on October 22, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Good debate everyone. I enjoyed reading it!
Lea said this on October 22, 2009 at 2:46 pm
John, I disagree about Ron and the horcrux. He had difficulty wearing it from the moment he puts it on, that was the reason for his foul mood right before he left. He wore it from September 2 to sometime in the fall. As soon as he takes it off, leaves and is minus it’s influence, he regrets the decision. He also admits his problems wearing it to Harry before he destroys the horcrux.
Loader Lady said this on October 24, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Wow, quite a discussion! My comment doesn’t follow it though, ha, ha! It’s about the Side-Along Apparation. I’ve always thought of Side-Along Apparation as a “last resort” method of travel used only in life-threatening emergencies, like when Death Eaters are attacking (as stated in the Mom pamphlet in HP6). It’s difficult enough to Apparate alone, let alone having someone holding onto you (like when Hermione side-along Apparates Ron and Harry from Grimmauld Place – Ron gets splinched). Dumbledore probably allows Harry to do it with him since he, Dumbledore, is much more experienced at Apparating.
Roonil Wazlib said this on October 24, 2009 at 5:33 pm
I’m a couple days late on the Tonks discussion, and I’m not ashamed to say that my favorite couple from HP is Lupin and Tonks, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that JK Rowling wrote Tonks into the books purely for Lupin. Am I crazy or does anyone else remember that?
Erin said this on October 24, 2009 at 5:46 pm
So THIS is what happens when I go without the internet for a few weeks?
I really don’t think Fleur should’ve come last in all of the Triwizard Tournament tasks (did she come last in the first task too?) I mean, they should have been shifting positions during the three competitions, not just Fleur being a complete idiot the whole time.
My thoughts on the “male-female strong lead character” debate…I reckon they’re pretty equal. There seem to be a few more males, but really – they all have strengths and they all have weaknesses, that’s what makes them interesting. They’re similar to normal people, we’re not exactly going to find an equal amount of strong boys and girls, are we? So many boys have their whole “I’m so strong” cover. In Harry Potter I guess you see a bit underneath the shields.
Eliza said this on October 24, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Loader Lady – A good point. I was just referring to the moment the images of Harry and Hermione came out of it to torture him, but you’re right that I wasn’t considering the full story there.
Roonil Wazlib – I love this idea, as I’d never thought of it this way before. But it TOTALLY makes sense, and helps explain all the discrepancies, too! I love explanations like that. :)
Erin – I’ve read all of the Rowling interviews that are catalogued on Accio Quote, and I’ve never seen that quote. So my guess would be that even though you read it somewhere, Rowling herself didn’t say it, so I don’t know that I’d give it much credibility. Though it’s possible there was an interview that AQ missed, of course, especially if it was particularly recent.
Thanks for the comments, everyone!
John Kearns said this on October 24, 2009 at 11:38 pm
Okay I’m a little late for the discussion…
I don’t think “strong” and “weak” are not necessarily the best choice of words here, all the characters show both. I think maybe there is a tendency in the books, though, for the female characters to fall into cliches moreso than the males.
-Tonks’s dramatic relationship troubles (which don’t seem as severe for Lupin) and her consequent loss of magic power (don’t forget Merope Gaunt also loses her powers over love)
-Fleur’s continual last placement in the TriWizard Tourney
-Molly remains a housewife even though after Book 2 there aren’t any more kids at home for her to take care of (and wouldn’t getting at least a part time job help with the Weasley’s financial situation?-and what does she do all day now?)
-Even Fleur, who’s such a strong willed character, seems to fall into the housewife roll with nary a peep, almost as if it was expected of her
-Ginny, after being so strong and prominent in the last several books, is relegated to “Harry’s girlfriend” in book 7 until she becomes “Harry’s wife” in the epilogue
There’s nothing wrong with women as housewives or getting upset over unrequited love, but different female cliches-a woman’s place is in the home and women are slaves to their emotions-seems to rear its ugly head at times.
martintenbones said this on October 25, 2009 at 2:45 pm
martintenbones, very well put. I think you hit the nail on the head as far as what bothered me about the females’ roles, and you phrased it much more eloquently than I did.
John Kearns said this on October 25, 2009 at 6:17 pm
I’ve noticed in several people’s comments the recurring, dismissive use of the term “housewife” (Fleur is just a housewife, Molly is just a housewife, etc). Why is being a housewife less important than being an auror or a ministry worker? Treating the role of “housewife” as a lesser occupation seems a bit sexist in itself.
Inky Squirrel said this on October 26, 2009 at 9:29 am
If I’ve sounded dismissive of the term “housewife” then I apologize, that wasn’t my intent.
I think maybe my main problem stems from the feeling that traditional, and even stereotypical, gender roles are sometimes unnecessarily emphasized within the books. Emphasized may not be the right word but maybe idealized or expected.
Molly and Fleur are good examples of this. Molly is a stay-at-home mom even after there’s not only no reason to do so (all of her children are either adults or are in school most of the year) but (at least) one very good reason not to (to add to the Weasley’s finances and ease their monetary woes). Many “housewives” do go out into the world to work once their children are grown for just these reasons (my own mom was one of them).
Fleur was not only a strong, independent young woman, she even has a job (at Gringotts) until she gets engaged to Bill, where she quietly becomes a housewife. It happened so quietly that there was a sense of “well, that’s what she’s supposed to do, that’s what’s expected of her”. Why would she stop working simply because she was getting married?
martintenbones said this on October 26, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Inky Squirrel, I second martintenbones’s comment – I didn’t mean it to be dismissive of the occupation either (I’m a househusband at the moment, or whatever you want to call it). It’s just a stereotype that was part of what made me frustrated with the female roles.
John Kearns said this on October 26, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Re-reading my last comment, I think I seemed a bit abrupt. I hope it didn’t come across that way.
I do see what you’re saying about the role of housewife now, martintenbones, particularly regarding Fleur’s transition as being assumed, despite having no children to care for, as well as a job that was potentially useful to the Order. She does sort of fade into that traditional role without an apparent reason. I hadn’t noticed it before.
Inky Squirrel said this on October 26, 2009 at 8:50 pm
When was it said that Fleur was a housewife? None of the Weasley’s were working at the time, Bill said that. Seeing as the DE’s attacked their wedding, it’s common knowledge that Fleur is married to Bill, so she can’t very well do anything at Gringotts for the Order. We don’t know whether Fleur went back to working at Gringotts (or anywhere else) or not after the war ended (unless JKR said something I don’t know about).
There are plenty of mothers in the series who work after marriage and children, such as Hermione, Luna, and Ginny. Three of the most significant female peers Harry had in his life become both mothers and have careers. And, we can’t forget Harry’s mother. In the vision we see in Voldemort’s head, Lily was the one who went out to do whatever needed to be done while they were in hiding, and James was at home with Harry. Neville’s mum was an Auror (who defied Voldemore three times, I might add). Even if Fluer was a housewife, does it really matter? Some women are more comfortable in the house then in a workplace, and if a few women in the series show that, then why shouldn’t they? To be honest, I don’t get the stereotypical housewife thing. Like I said, many women in the series aren’t simply housewives.
Riley said this on October 26, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Riley, I totally get what you’re saying (and you’re right about Fleur perhaps having had a job – I hadn’t thought that one through). But I don’t know if I agree with your examples. Hermione, Luna, and Ginny would be great examples – if any of them were mentioned in the books. And I’m not sure what you’re referring to with “Lily was the one who went out to do whatever needed to be done while they were in hiding.” All Voldemort ever saw was James and Lily both in the house, right?.
I also don’t think anybody here is saying that a housewife is necessarily a bad thing to be – as I said, it’s a choice I’ve made myself. But it is a female stereotype, and it is negative in the sense that it can be constraining. If Rowling wanted to show women having the opportunity to break out of that role, why not do it in the books, instead of waiting for a later interview where she discussed what she thought the younger characters went on to do as adults? She certainly had plenty of space, and, as I pointed out earlier, opportunities. That was my frustration.
John Kearns said this on October 26, 2009 at 10:47 pm
You’re right. I don’t where I got the Lily thing from, because I reread the part, and it wasn’t there. I must have read something else, or my mind mixed some canon with some theroy, or something. Sorry about that.
Perhaps why I am less objectful to the way females are treated in the books is because I’m in high school. Hermione, Ginny, and Luna are more likely to be the ones I identify with. So, since they are strong, capable young women, I tend to see that more than Mrs. Weasley, or someone her age. I could see where people might see Mrs. Weasley as a stereotype, but I just can’t quite connect with it the same way that I would if say, Hermione was a submissive female who let Harry and Ron walk all over her.
Riley said this on October 27, 2009 at 6:51 pm
I remember how my friend was all angry with JKR because she thought she had changed her style now that she lived in the US and knew the books were made into movies. My friend thought Tonks was written in because she would look cool in the movie.
hpboy13, Tonks’ role in the series was not to fall in love with Lupin, but to have a baby boy who would soon be an orphan due to a war with Voldemort.
John, “females being equal to males” doesn’t sound right to me. Why do they have to be made equal at all? They are different, but none is better, right? This reminds me of a comic of a school for different animals (a chimp, an elephant, a snake, a fish,…) and to give them all an equal chance they all have to climb a tree.
martintenbones, how is a man not being a househusband less a clichè than a woman being a housewife?
I was thinking the same about Side-Along Apparition. I’m assuming that it makes a better read when different means of transportation are introduced spaced throughout the series.
So people are doing magic in the Dursley’s house similar to how Dobby did magic there. Weren’t they afraid Harry would get punished for this, too?
We learn about the Disillusionment charm in this book. (Or do we? Might it be similar to the Invisibility Booster of the Ford Anglia? But it’s said in book 2 that Harry couldn’t see himself while here he sort of can.) Anyway, I was wondering if this is what Dumbledore meant in book 1 when he said he doesn’t need an invisibility cloak to make himself invisible.
Oh, and what about Harry’s broom, was it affected by the charm? And the Order members? Wouldn’t it be a bit suspicious if they were visibly flying around something invisible?
About the location of headquaters: Jane Austin writes in Pride and Prejudice: “Where else can they be so well concealed” about two characters hiding in London.
Kim said this on November 3, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Wow, Kim, glad to read your note!
Concerning the Aurors/Order members doing magic at the Dursleys: wasn’t the reason Harry got in trouble because they could detect magic but not another wizard? (A tracking method used by Voldemort himself on his enchanted boat in the cave.) However, it then makes me wonder what sort of (poor) monitoring system there really is that folks at the Ministry didn’t notice a bunch of wizards using magic at Number 4.
Harry himself says later on in the series that Dumbledore can perform such a good Disillusionment Charm that he needs no invisibility cloak.
Love the Jane Austen tie-in. :D
Natalia said this on November 3, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Natalia, thanks for answering my questions. Good points!
Kim said this on November 3, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Getting in a little late, but my question is why? Why would you have liked JKR to add something in about “strong” women? That’s not what the books are about and I don’t think adding it would have helped. They’re meant to be real, as real as a wizarding world can be. Women become housewives half the time, because they want to take care of their families and sometimes they are affected so greatly by love that their whole character can change. They are called cliches for a reason, because it’s predictable, because that’s what happens in real life. I would never say I’m disappointed with Tonks, sometimes love is that powerful, it changes you. Just like with Fluer, we see how love transforms her from a somewhat selfish young girl into a women who cares about others deeply. I would never call Molly weak, everything she did was for her family. And why are we even talking about Fluer being last in the Triwizard Championship, would we be talking about how weak Krum was if he ended up last in all the tasks. I for one had never even made a connection to Fluer “the only girl” ending last.
Joyce said this on November 22, 2009 at 1:26 am
Joyce, I can’t answer for everyone, but for me the answer is: role models. Rowling has said that she gets loads of letters from little girls thanking her for showing, through Hermione, that brainy girls can be cool. Why not an adult character that does the same thing? It doesn’t have to be (nor do I think it should be) what the books are ‘about’ – I’m not saying Harry should have been Harriet.
And no, we wouldn’t be talking about how weak Krum was, because that’s not the point of the conversation. Fleur was the only girl; she finished last by an overwhelming margin (I mean, she got creamed). It jumped out at me as I was reading it. And in isolation I’m okay with that, just like in isolation I’m okay with Tonks’s character development – it’s not an unrealistic possibility. It’s the aggregate of all of the little moments like these that left me disappointed with the adult females in the books. The little examples don’t each make an argument on their own, but they do add up to something bigger. That’s my feeling.
Although, as you will see if you read the comments above, I did get my mind changed several times and I don’t feel as strongly about it as I once did. :)
John Kearns said this on November 22, 2009 at 8:36 am
The thing that bothers me most of about Tonks (because I think the whole thing of her moping is a red herring for the plot) is that she left her infant son to join the battle and when she was asked “why” she said something like (going from memory) “I couldn’t stand being at home and not knowing.” If she had said “I want my son to have a world to live in,” I could have worked with that. But abandoning a presumably still-nursing infant just to get news faster made me think so much less of her, and seemed so unrealistic. It was the opposite of the issue in the discussion — i.e. her acting unlike what a mother would be expected to do.
Anna said this on March 7, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Hi, I’m reading OotP again for the umpteenth time, so have been rereading John’s comments etc, and the responses above. Really good reading and many good points. But I do have to go along with Joyce – “Why does it matter” that there is not an equal number of “strong” women as men. Real life isn’t split into equal numbers of opposites – and strength isn’t just physical (ie fighting the good fight) it’s a lot about strength of character and most of JKR’s women do have this strength even though they can sometimes crack (mostly due to love and worry for their families). With regard to Fleur’s coming last in each part of the Triwizard – the way the points were given wasn’t really very fair, was it? Especially with Karkaroff (and even Percy Weasley) giving 10 for tasks which had flaws. Poor Fleur was really in the minority there. But even if she didn’t win, she still faced each of the tasks the boys did – that would take some courage. Really looking forward to the next two books comments John.
Electa said this on April 27, 2010 at 1:17 am
Hi everyone! I am a new reader and I have enjoyed all of your comments about the books.
In defense of Ginny (who is my favorite character) she proves herself to be one tough lady. I admired the way she grew from a shy little girl to a confident, self-possessed woman. Harry was darn lucky to find such a partner. She proved herself to be a loyal friend and fighter. I agree with Kim. Ginny was a victim to what people thought about her not who she truly was.
GinGin4 said this on May 5, 2010 at 5:29 pm
Perhaps I missed it in the comments above, but I don’t think anyone pointed out how, with the exception of the teaching staff (minus Snape of course), all the characters are rather young, especially for wizards. Arthur and Molly are approx. in their mid-late forties, Lupin, Snape, and Sirius are about thirty-seven (Snape and Sirius show definite signs of clinical emotional retardation at that!), Tonks is probably in her mid-twenties, and the kids are even younger. Yes, Tonks is going to behave as if the world ended because the man she wants doesn’t seem to want her back. For all her abilities, she’s still a heartbroken young woman and I have known women (and men) that moped for over a year over losing “the one.” (Always wanted to smack them myself, and because I like her, especially Tonks.)
I suppose what I’m trying to say is that with the exception of Snape, Sirius, and to a lesser extent Lupin, the characters act age appropriate.
Molly acts the mother because that’s what she’s been since she was (I assume) quite young. An older Tonks might not have acted the lovelorn idiot quite so much and (skipping ahead a bit) might not have had an “oops” that put her out of the action.
I always assumed that Fleur was a “throwaway” character and was actually surprised to see her return.
And Ginny and Hermione act older and are far stronger emotionally than Sirius and Snape, especially in OOTP. Admittedly, it’s been a while, and my books are five hundred miles away, so I could be wrong on that count.
Amanda said this on May 23, 2010 at 3:07 am