![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rj_andersonThis is an interesting review of my HP fic(s). ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
lizbee has already made a couple of comments on one remark she felt was misleading; but it was another part of the review that particularly baffled me.
Here's the remark in question:
I was really hoping that Maud would redeem her MS qualities or something... but no-- she's the tortured girl that everyone can't help but love.
This is the second negative LJ review to make this accusation, and I am sincerely perplexed by it. "Everyone" loves Maud? I stated quite plainly in the story that she had few friends at Durmstrang and even fewer at Hogwarts, and the only students who even attempt to befriend her are the Weasley twins. Her roommate Muriel beats her up and her other roommates spread malicious gossip about her. Draco regards her with supercilious contempt. Even in the later fics, Maud's dealings with other students are merely civil at best (as when she meets Hermione in the library in PR), and at worst downright adversarial. She doesn't acquire a single friend apart from George Weasley until she leaves Hogwarts. So who is this mysterious "everyone"?
Maybe the reviewer really means that all the adults in the fic love Maud. Well, there are only four of those in TPMA. Mad-Eye raised Maud and she's his niece, so I guess he has to like her. (I should mention, for those thinking of writing fic, that heaven forbid your OC should be related to any canon character, even a lesser canon character; that automatically makes her Special, and therefore a Mary Sue. And here I just thought it would be a good excuse for having lots of Mad-Eye Moody in the story.)
Moody's got a reasonable excuse, that leaves Snape, Dumbledore and McGonagall. I think my logic behind having Snape treat Maud with considerably more decency and respect than he does Harry & co. is explained in the fic. Obviously the reviewer doesn't agree that Snape could or would treat anyone with civility or respect, much less love or be loved by anyone, so that aspect of the trilogy doesn't work for her. Fine, I can live with that. Personally I don't think even JKR takes that extreme a view of Snape's character, for all that she enjoys playing up his negative qualities through Harry's eyes. But I guess only time and canon will tell.
So back to the supposed Maud Moody love-in. McGonagall, for her part, does nothing but politely guide Maud to a meeting with the Headmaster. Unless that counts as "love" in some strange subtextual way, we're left with only Dumbledore. Who, as we know from canon, is kind and generous and benignly meddling with all his students, so... where is this "loved by all" stuff coming from again?
I don't mind having my work reviewed critically. Some of my favorite reviewers have been quite direct in pointing out flaws, as well as being honest about things they personally don't like to see in stories (Oi! for instance, never gave a fig for Snape and didn't particularly warm to Maud either, and I still loved her reviews). I can even think of some pretty severe criticisms myself (for the record, those include wobbly characterization of Maud in the first story; a number of embarrassing continuity gaffes involving numbers, dates, and architectural layouts; a really cringe-worthy bit of dialogue in the first chapter of IWS; and too much schmoop in Snape's letters, among others).
But I do object to the reviewer misrepresenting the content of my fics and disparaging faults of which they are not in fact guilty. Aslizbee pointed out, that's not a valid form of criticism.
lizbee has already made a couple of comments on one remark she felt was misleading; but it was another part of the review that particularly baffled me.Here's the remark in question:
I was really hoping that Maud would redeem her MS qualities or something... but no-- she's the tortured girl that everyone can't help but love.
This is the second negative LJ review to make this accusation, and I am sincerely perplexed by it. "Everyone" loves Maud? I stated quite plainly in the story that she had few friends at Durmstrang and even fewer at Hogwarts, and the only students who even attempt to befriend her are the Weasley twins. Her roommate Muriel beats her up and her other roommates spread malicious gossip about her. Draco regards her with supercilious contempt. Even in the later fics, Maud's dealings with other students are merely civil at best (as when she meets Hermione in the library in PR), and at worst downright adversarial. She doesn't acquire a single friend apart from George Weasley until she leaves Hogwarts. So who is this mysterious "everyone"?
Maybe the reviewer really means that all the adults in the fic love Maud. Well, there are only four of those in TPMA. Mad-Eye raised Maud and she's his niece, so I guess he has to like her. (I should mention, for those thinking of writing fic, that heaven forbid your OC should be related to any canon character, even a lesser canon character; that automatically makes her Special, and therefore a Mary Sue. And here I just thought it would be a good excuse for having lots of Mad-Eye Moody in the story.)
Moody's got a reasonable excuse, that leaves Snape, Dumbledore and McGonagall. I think my logic behind having Snape treat Maud with considerably more decency and respect than he does Harry & co. is explained in the fic. Obviously the reviewer doesn't agree that Snape could or would treat anyone with civility or respect, much less love or be loved by anyone, so that aspect of the trilogy doesn't work for her. Fine, I can live with that. Personally I don't think even JKR takes that extreme a view of Snape's character, for all that she enjoys playing up his negative qualities through Harry's eyes. But I guess only time and canon will tell.
So back to the supposed Maud Moody love-in. McGonagall, for her part, does nothing but politely guide Maud to a meeting with the Headmaster. Unless that counts as "love" in some strange subtextual way, we're left with only Dumbledore. Who, as we know from canon, is kind and generous and benignly meddling with all his students, so... where is this "loved by all" stuff coming from again?
I don't mind having my work reviewed critically. Some of my favorite reviewers have been quite direct in pointing out flaws, as well as being honest about things they personally don't like to see in stories (Oi! for instance, never gave a fig for Snape and didn't particularly warm to Maud either, and I still loved her reviews). I can even think of some pretty severe criticisms myself (for the record, those include wobbly characterization of Maud in the first story; a number of embarrassing continuity gaffes involving numbers, dates, and architectural layouts; a really cringe-worthy bit of dialogue in the first chapter of IWS; and too much schmoop in Snape's letters, among others).
But I do object to the reviewer misrepresenting the content of my fics and disparaging faults of which they are not in fact guilty. As
lizbee pointed out, that's not a valid form of criticism.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-03-24 09:33 am (UTC)You say about canon Hermione that she didn't strike you as a Mary Sue until Goblet of Fire, when she turns up to the ball looking good on the arm of Viktor Krum. Now, personally, I saw that as something of a cliche - but one which Rowling acknowledged to be a cliche and was playing with, slightly. It doesn't have anything to do, I suggest, with Rowling's psychology, but with how she wants to treat the readers whom she knows will identify most with Hermione.
The cliche image is the librarian with the glasses and the hair in the bun in the 40s film, whom Cary Grant or Humphrey Bogart removes the glasses from, takes the hairpins out of and voila ! Raving beauty city! True, wish-fulfilment, but it's actually intended to make the brainy, underappreciated girl readers (or viewers) feel good as they put down the books or leave the cinema. It's intended to put down all the glamour pusses who everyone else has known to be raving beauties from the beginning, with the less obvious star coming through from behind and waltzing off with the prince.
Now, if a Mary Sue by definition is so stunning that she could expect Krum to invite her to the ball as a matter of course, the idea wouldn't work. It is, actually, a geniune surprise when Hermione turns up with Krum (well, it was for me) and so it works dramatically. Are you saying that for fear of Mary Suery Hermione isn't allowed any of the perks of being the nearest thing to a heroine the stories have? This is not a novel of gritty realism, after all, you know.
no subject
Date: 2003-03-24 12:26 pm (UTC)Quite so. There probably is some use to the Mary Sue idea (although it would be better just to label it "bad characterization" and use whatever subcategory you wish without resorting to the name), but certainly one shouldn't be seeking them out. They should jump up and hit you over the head. And steal your lip gloss.
Now if you combined Fleur and Hermione, that would be a Mary Sue.
Erica, who bumps into things when she takes off her glasses
no subject
Date: 2003-03-24 12:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-24 05:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-03-24 06:25 pm (UTC)True. People do scream "Mary Sue" far too often (including myself upon occasion). It's also true that Hermione becoming a beauty and dating Victor Krum is wish-fulfillment and a cliche. It's far more satisfying than seeing Parvati or Lavender date him, that's for sure (if I were Ron and Harry, I'd rather go to the ball single).
However, I think it takes away from the realism of the character. Dating Krum, while unrealistic, doesn't bother me as much as her sudden transformation at the ball. I think that it would be far more narratively satisfying for Hermione to not turn into a raving beauty overnight and still go to the ball with Viktor Krum. I think that this would help those who do identify with Hermione realize that you don't have to be beautiful to get a date.
True, Harry Potter is not very realistic. I just think that there are certain realities that it should keep as realistic.