In book 4, Dudley is trying to lose weight. The narration says he’s “the size of a baby whale”, and constantly mocks him. Harry taunts him with food, and the Weasley twins give him magic candy that causes his tongue to swell to the size of an anaconda. Thing is, Dudley doesn’t actually do anything mean to Harry in this book. This treatment is retribution for abuse that happened years ago, and Dudley was and is a child.
The narration constantly insults women characters by calling them fat, saying they have “mannish hands”, and pointing out masculine facial features. When Rowling doesn’t like a woman, she calls her fat or masculine. In Harry Potter, moral failings are usually accompanied by failure to embody femininity.
Oh yeah. He did work on loosing weight. I really liked his redemtion arc and character by the end of the books. Yeah, that was retribution from children to children. Felt very “Lord of the Flies” esque when I was reading it. I wouldn’t call that fatphobia myself, but I understand your perspective better. Thanks for the quick response.
The thing is, you have to make some sort of distinction between what Harry thinks, and what Rowling as the narrator says. The narration is always going on about how bad women have “mannish hands”. Is Harry a raging misogynist in his private thoughts, or is this the voice of the author? And if this is the voice of the author, why is Rowling making fun of childhood obesity? Why is Rowling joining in Harry’s abuse of Dudley? I can understand Harry being mean to Dudley, he has a pretty decent motivation. Rowling is a grown adult and was not abused by the Dursleys, so why is she so mean-spirited to her own character? Why is she saying he’s the size of a baby whale?
Yes. I’d just guess that the answer I interpret from those questions and what you interpret are different in a few ways. Understanding insensitivities that were baked into older media is valuable, and why I try to understand people’s criticism better. But just like Bill Gates giving to charity doesn’t make him a good person, having biases show up in a fictional novel doesn’t negate the moral lessons and the escapism it can offer. You seem to have a very strong opinion on the topic, and I have learned more from hearing your perspective. Thank you.
In book 4, Dudley is trying to lose weight. The narration says he’s “the size of a baby whale”, and constantly mocks him. Harry taunts him with food, and the Weasley twins give him magic candy that causes his tongue to swell to the size of an anaconda. Thing is, Dudley doesn’t actually do anything mean to Harry in this book. This treatment is retribution for abuse that happened years ago, and Dudley was and is a child.
The narration constantly insults women characters by calling them fat, saying they have “mannish hands”, and pointing out masculine facial features. When Rowling doesn’t like a woman, she calls her fat or masculine. In Harry Potter, moral failings are usually accompanied by failure to embody femininity.
Oh yeah. He did work on loosing weight. I really liked his redemtion arc and character by the end of the books. Yeah, that was retribution from children to children. Felt very “Lord of the Flies” esque when I was reading it. I wouldn’t call that fatphobia myself, but I understand your perspective better. Thanks for the quick response.
The thing is, you have to make some sort of distinction between what Harry thinks, and what Rowling as the narrator says. The narration is always going on about how bad women have “mannish hands”. Is Harry a raging misogynist in his private thoughts, or is this the voice of the author? And if this is the voice of the author, why is Rowling making fun of childhood obesity? Why is Rowling joining in Harry’s abuse of Dudley? I can understand Harry being mean to Dudley, he has a pretty decent motivation. Rowling is a grown adult and was not abused by the Dursleys, so why is she so mean-spirited to her own character? Why is she saying he’s the size of a baby whale?
Yes. I’d just guess that the answer I interpret from those questions and what you interpret are different in a few ways. Understanding insensitivities that were baked into older media is valuable, and why I try to understand people’s criticism better. But just like Bill Gates giving to charity doesn’t make him a good person, having biases show up in a fictional novel doesn’t negate the moral lessons and the escapism it can offer. You seem to have a very strong opinion on the topic, and I have learned more from hearing your perspective. Thank you.