the kind of literary analysis we have in Lit classes is so simplistic but it is meant to teach critical thinking.
it's just not great at it.
the perennial example: the blue curtains. Why were the curtains blue? English class will have you guess that the author was trying to create a mood, or built a metaphor. that might be true, but the real critical thinking you need is different.
let's do another example and i'll show you what i mean.
within jk rowling's novels, the Harry Potter series, there is only one named irish character, seamus finnegan. this character is shown to have a fascination with explosions and alcohol throughout the books. this is likely because during the time jk rowling was growing up, the Troubles were occuring and she would have seen a lot of news about bombs in ireland, associating the two in her mind whether she realised it or not.
thus, we see, a stereotype is born of a person's experiences. a harmful stereotype.
and if the writer did not take the time to try and write past those experiences, then their biases will shine through every time.
rowling consistently describes villainous women as 'mannish' with 'thick fingers' 'square jaws' and 'wide shoulders' - see rita skeeter and dolores umbrige especially. they are also often written as overperforming feminity with heavy makeup, bright clothing, an excess of pink, and high, irritating voices. bellatrix lestrange is another example, overperforming femininity in a more sexual way, defined of her love for an insane man.
from this, we can infer that ms rowling believes that a bad woman is someone who, despite trying to appear feminine and womanly, has manly traits leak through.
as far as we know, she has never examined this bias.
she also, just in general, dislikes girlish things. hermione granger, luna lovegood and ginny weasley are all female characters who fall into the trap of being strong, independent women while also losing their chance to be allowed to be pretty and feminine within the plot. aside from the yule ball, we never see any of these girls doing anything stereotypically feminine - they do not like children, or makeup, or fashion, they do not gossip or form 'girlfriend' groups, and just in general they all seem to be outcasts from their fellow girls. they are all loud, weird, rude, tomboys etc. and while that is certainly something to aspire to, shouldn't girls be allowed to be feminine too?
it's like ms rowling believes that femininity is alright in moderation, that it is not something to ever focus on and if you do, well, you must either 1) know literally nothing else, as seen by hermione's roommates, who are essentially defined by their love of animals, divination and gossip throughout the books, or 2) you are using it to hide a darker personality trait, as shown above.
the idea that a woman is only a 3d character if she tosses aside her femininity is reductive and antifeminist.
thus, i conclude that ms rowling has an unexamined bias surrounding femininity and who is allowed to perform it. this, naturally, leads us to the question - is this part of the reason why she fell so easily into her current crusade? and, with her cocooned away from the ordinary people, will we ever be able to reach her and show her the truth?
Donate to Stonewall UK here
