/Mrs. Weasley: I just don’t know how Bill will ever marry now! Will that stupid French girl even like him anymore now that he’s no longer beautiful?/
Her son’s been brutally attacked and one of the first things she thinks is, “Oh, well, at least that awful French woman won’t want to marry him now.” How classy.
/Tonks: Fleur promises to stand by her man no matter what, even if he’s been scarred by a werewolf. So in conclusion, Lupin and I should get married!/
Speaking of “classy” women…
/Tonks: Alas, that is my fate as a minor character in this series./
Tonks: Since our author didn’t know what else to do with me. Like, say, using my shapeshifting ability to lure Voldemort into a trap or find out more information about his plans.
/Harry: That’s none of your business! Dumbledore told me never to tell you anything about what we were doing!/
Yes, Minerva, even though you’ve served Dumbledore faithfully all these years, both in school and in the war effort, you still can’t be allowed to know anything about his plans. Because…?
/[And Fawkes flies off into the sunset]/
Yay! Did he also run into Crookshanks, by any chance? ;)
I’m under the impression JKR inserted Tonks into the story because people were complaining about the small number of interesting female characters in the series. Then she didn’t know what to do with her. It turns out Tonks’s only purpose was to demonstrate that love affects one’s Patronus, thereby setting us up for Snape’s symbolic silver doe. And to produce a baby Marauder and die, setting Harry up with a symbolic orphan.
Clearly, women are important for only two things: love and babies. It reminds me of Isaac Asimov saying that he didn’t have female characters in his stories because he didn’t write about romance-as if that’s the only reason for females to exist. Considering his era and background, I can forgive Asimov a lot more easily than JKR.
I always thought someone should have advised Asimov to write his stories as usual with all men, then put the names of all the characters into a hat and pull out a couple at random. He could make those characters women without changing anything except names and pronouns, and everyone would rave about his realistic women characters. Women are human beings, people! Just write ’em that way!
/Clearly, women are important for only two things: love and babies./
Well, Hermione, Minerva, Bellatrix, Umbridge and others are examples of major female characters who aren’t solely determined by either of those things, but I guess that this is referring to Tonks’ function?
/It reminds me of Isaac Asimov saying that he didn’t have female characters in his stories because he didn’t write about romance-as if that’s the only reason for females to exist./
And that’s not even true! I’ve only read a few of his stories, but one of the main characters in “The Mule” was a woman…whom the Mule cared for/possibly was attracted to and that’s why his plan was foiled in the end…but who also was trying to defeat the Mule with her husband and who ultimately figured him out. Yes, she was someone’s wife and someone that the antagonist liked, but that’s not all she was!
/Considering his era and background, I can forgive Asimov a lot more easily than JKR./
Well, I’ve seen a few critics who haven’t cut him as much slack. One of them pointed out that some of his sci-fi contemporaries *were* women (such as C.L. Moore, Leigh Brackett, etc.) and since he apparently had the vision and creativity to imagine all of these detailed governments and technology in the future, would it really be so much of a stretch for him to picture a world in which women had more say?
/I always thought someone should have advised Asimov to write his stories as usual with all men, then put the names of all the characters into a hat and pull out a couple at random. He could make those characters women without changing anything except names and pronouns, and everyone would rave about his realistic women characters. Women are human beings, people! Just write ’em that way!/
Of course you’ll still get those people who use that obnoxious phrase “men with breasts” (because obviously if a female character isn’t fretting about babies or men, doesn’t care for stereotypically feminine things, and is skilled and stoic, you’re ignoring her femininity and making her practically a man *eyeroll*), but if you just write them as characters and people first, without worrying about pasting on “feminine things” (ex. a female warrior who’ll start randomly angsting about not being alive to bear children), then maybe it’ll result in less stereotypical characters.
Tonks, Bellatrix, and Umbridge showed up all at once in Book Five. Before that there was just Hermione as a major female character. Molly, Minerva, and Petunia are classic female cliches (Earth Mother, Spinster Schoolmarm, Evil Stepmother), and decidedly second tier, if not third.
Of course there are only five major characters in the series altogether. Upping the percentage of females would have required Albina Dumbledore or Severina Snape. Which would you prefer? Wise Old Grandmother or Wicked Witch? Or both?
Well, considering that Dumbledore is still widely considered to be Harry’s wise old mentor by fans at large, despite all that this community has said about him, I think that I would pick Albina if I had to choose between her and Severina. She would break stereotypes not only by being the mentor of a male protagonist (since protagonists in general rarely have female mentors), but also by being the archenemy of Voldemort, the Only One He Ever Feared. She would still be the extremely powerful and respected figure in the wizarding world. Severina, by contrast, would only receive her due until after she was dead, until after Harry had spent seven books despising her. So, I think that Albina would be a more positive example of female representation. Of course, if Dumbledore were female, I’m doubtful that her romance with Gellert would have been only revealed in a post-series interview.
She would break stereotypes not only by being the mentor of a male protagonist (since protagonists in general rarely have female mentors)
The Irish legend Finn MacCool (Fionn mac Cumhaill) and Firestar, in the Warriors books, are exceptions to this. Their mentors are Liath Luachra and Bluestar, respectively. The Warriors books have about as many female mentors as male ones, and cats of both sexes mentor other cats of both sexes.
also by being the archenemy of Voldemort, the Only One He Ever Feared.
Bluestar is archenemy of Tigerstar, her former deputy who tried to murder her to take over ThunderClan.
Of course, if Dumbledore were female, I’m doubtful that her romance with Gellert would have been only revealed in a post-series interview.
It could still work that way if Gellert became Gellerta. Of course, that raises the other stereotypical problem: A woman's lover leaves her, and she is so devastated that her grief derails her formerly brilliant future, causing her to become a virtual nun and schoolteacher for the rest of her life. That's ridiculously old-fashioned, but given the antiquated ideals of these books, it would fit the subliminal messages, if not the surface ones.
Her son’s been brutally attacked and one of the first things she thinks is, “Oh, well, at least that awful French woman won’t want to marry him now.” How classy.
/Tonks: Fleur promises to stand by her man no matter what, even if he’s been scarred by a werewolf. So in conclusion, Lupin and I should get married!/
Speaking of “classy” women…
/Tonks: Alas, that is my fate as a minor character in this series./
Tonks: Since our author didn’t know what else to do with me. Like, say, using my shapeshifting ability to lure Voldemort into a trap or find out more information about his plans.
/Harry: That’s none of your business! Dumbledore told me never to tell you anything about what we were doing!/
Yes, Minerva, even though you’ve served Dumbledore faithfully all these years, both in school and in the war effort, you still can’t be allowed to know anything about his plans. Because…?
/[And Fawkes flies off into the sunset]/
Yay! Did he also run into Crookshanks, by any chance? ;)
Reply
Clearly, women are important for only two things: love and babies. It reminds me of Isaac Asimov saying that he didn’t have female characters in his stories because he didn’t write about romance-as if that’s the only reason for females to exist. Considering his era and background, I can forgive Asimov a lot more easily than JKR.
I always thought someone should have advised Asimov to write his stories as usual with all men, then put the names of all the characters into a hat and pull out a couple at random. He could make those characters women without changing anything except names and pronouns, and everyone would rave about his realistic women characters. Women are human beings, people! Just write ’em that way!
Reply
Well, Hermione, Minerva, Bellatrix, Umbridge and others are examples of major female characters who aren’t solely determined by either of those things, but I guess that this is referring to Tonks’ function?
/It reminds me of Isaac Asimov saying that he didn’t have female characters in his stories because he didn’t write about romance-as if that’s the only reason for females to exist./
And that’s not even true! I’ve only read a few of his stories, but one of the main characters in “The Mule” was a woman…whom the Mule cared for/possibly was attracted to and that’s why his plan was foiled in the end…but who also was trying to defeat the Mule with her husband and who ultimately figured him out. Yes, she was someone’s wife and someone that the antagonist liked, but that’s not all she was!
/Considering his era and background, I can forgive Asimov a lot more easily than JKR./
Well, I’ve seen a few critics who haven’t cut him as much slack. One of them pointed out that some of his sci-fi contemporaries *were* women (such as C.L. Moore, Leigh Brackett, etc.) and since he apparently had the vision and creativity to imagine all of these detailed governments and technology in the future, would it really be so much of a stretch for him to picture a world in which women had more say?
/I always thought someone should have advised Asimov to write his stories as usual with all men, then put the names of all the characters into a hat and pull out a couple at random. He could make those characters women without changing anything except names and pronouns, and everyone would rave about his realistic women characters. Women are human beings, people! Just write ’em that way!/
Yes, exactly! That’s what happened with Ripley in “Alien” and Angelina Jolie’s character in “Salt.” (Or vice versa, with Luke Skywalker: http://exonauts.blogspot.com/2010/06/interstellar-inspiration-from.html)
Of course you’ll still get those people who use that obnoxious phrase “men with breasts” (because obviously if a female character isn’t fretting about babies or men, doesn’t care for stereotypically feminine things, and is skilled and stoic, you’re ignoring her femininity and making her practically a man *eyeroll*), but if you just write them as characters and people first, without worrying about pasting on “feminine things” (ex. a female warrior who’ll start randomly angsting about not being alive to bear children), then maybe it’ll result in less stereotypical characters.
Reply
Of course there are only five major characters in the series altogether. Upping the percentage of females would have required Albina Dumbledore or Severina Snape. Which would you prefer? Wise Old Grandmother or Wicked Witch? Or both?
Reply
Reply
The Irish legend Finn MacCool (Fionn mac Cumhaill) and Firestar, in the Warriors books, are exceptions to this. Their mentors are Liath Luachra and Bluestar, respectively. The Warriors books have about as many female mentors as male ones, and cats of both sexes mentor other cats of both sexes.
also by being the archenemy of Voldemort, the Only One He Ever Feared.
Bluestar is archenemy of Tigerstar, her former deputy who tried to murder her to take over ThunderClan.
Of course, if Dumbledore were female, I’m doubtful that her romance with Gellert would have been only revealed in a post-series interview.
It could still work that way if Gellert became Gellerta. Of course, that raises the other stereotypical problem: A woman's lover leaves her, and she is so devastated that her grief derails her formerly brilliant future, causing her to become a virtual nun and schoolteacher for the rest of her life. That's ridiculously old-fashioned, but given the antiquated ideals of these books, it would fit the subliminal messages, if not the surface ones.
Reply
Leave a comment