Harry Potter
Harry Potter

India-Forums

   

Ginny and harry as a couple??!!! (Page 9)

Nandoo IF-Dazzler
Nandoo
Nandoo

Joined: 19 November 2007
Posts: 4887

Posted: 06 May 2009 at 11:56pm | IP Logged
Hey Lalitha and Khushboo ......

First of all Iam damn happy to see lovely ppl around here and to my surprise , both of your names relates to me in a loving way ....u knw....Lalitha is my sweet cousin's name , I call her Lalli( if u love it and permit me...thn i wanna call u wid tht name.....if u just likes it...otherwise no problem...) and Khushboo....my good friend from my schooling....(i just dont wnt to tell u wht i call her when we both fight.....i guess u might have got it.... :) :) JK JK )

Hmm coming to our topic..... Yeah Lalitha, i did feel like i didnt touch enough things about Ginny but wht to do......Loving constraint restricted me...he he he....towards Hermoine. As you posted the reference from the book that Harry feels/treats Hermoine as his sister, that is the place where i was devastated. I dont have words at all. I was just dumb struck. When I was reading the series, I got the 5th book wrong one, and when I started reading it, I felt soo different from the original one, coz there in that book the unknown-authour wrote Harry/Hermoine 's love, relationship. Might be it made me feel like that but still what all the things I listed down there in my previous post, they all seems like a person who loves's Harry can do it, for me.

Khushboo,  What all you said about Hermoine is correct, she is doing all the things and researching/colleting the information for not only Harry but for the sake of the entire Wizarding World. Harry needs a person some one like that in his life as his lifepartner , who can help him , who can stand by him in worst cases, who is having a very good knowledge which he needs, who cares for him, who can do things before he can think of asking that thing to do, whose brain and heart works when his own stops working(coz of the terrific things happening around him or by the ppl who made his brain not to work). So, the qualities which Harry needs in his LifePartner are all in Hermoine. So, again my conclusion is Harry/Hermoine forever and ever and ever.

If feel like JKR wanted to give Harry a family , a family which he craves for , a family which he sees and thinks of having such a family for him, a family where the mother whould be like Mrs.Weasley. So, by having all this in mind , JKR might have thought of giving Harry the family which he wants and wants Harry to be related to tht family in some means.....which ultimately turns into Harry/Ginny pair. Otherwise it wont happen ....right!!!!!!

If Harry/Hermoine becomes a pair, there wont be any family relationship with the Weasley's. Other chances which ultimately reaches the same point is Harry/Luna (cant imagine), Harry/Cho (huh!!! Forget it).
..RamKiJanaki.. IF-Stunnerz
..RamKiJanaki..
..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008
Posts: 45659

Posted: 07 May 2009 at 6:41am | IP Logged
Originally posted by VirgoVixen

Hey Nandoo, nice to hear your opinions but I disagree.
I agree that Harry-Hermione would have made a great pair, IF JKR had decided to go for it, then she would have included that missing component of romantic/physical attraction as well. But it was evident that the purpose of of Hermione's as Harry's best friend was something more important. I know love starts from friendship, but love doesn't always have to be equal to friendship....it can only transform into romantic love if it goes beyond that. This last step just didn't happen with Harry-Hermione because they both had set their hearts on someone else. If you think realistically, Harry-Ginny and Ron-Hermione are very realistic couples, as in when you actually fall in love you don't go "okay let me count what he/she did for me and why he/she deserves my love"...you never think intellectually about them, it just happens and sometimes you can't even control it since it's such a powerful emotion. Hermione never thought intellectually about Ron...she just had feelings for him that's why she was able to forgive his weakness (and vice versa) And about all the things you mentioned as Hermione doing for Harry, she wasn't exclusively doing it for him because remember Harry's fate and fight with Voldemort isn't only about him, it's about ethics, morality, right and wrong and it includes the danger/safety of the whole wizarding world. She wasn't researching information only for Harry, she was proving herslef a good friend and a functioning part of the trio.Smile
 
Right! Hermione is one of my very favorite characters in the series, but I don't prefer her as Harry's partner because I think Hermione/Ron are more natural and sweet.EmbarrassedDay Dreaming I like the point you made about Hermione doing the things for the wizarding world in general, not only Harry.
..RamKiJanaki.. IF-Stunnerz
..RamKiJanaki..
..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008
Posts: 45659

Posted: 07 May 2009 at 6:51am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Nandoo

Hey Lalitha and Khushboo ......

First of all Iam damn happy to see lovely ppl around here and to my surprise , both of your names relates to me in a loving way ....u knw....Lalitha is my sweet cousin's name , I call her Lalli( if u love it and permit me...thn i wanna call u wid tht name.....if u just likes it...otherwise no problem...) and Khushboo....my good friend from my schooling....(i just dont wnt to tell u wht i call her when we both fight.....i guess u might have got it.... :) :) JK JK )

Hmm coming to our topic..... Yeah Lalitha, i did feel like i didnt touch enough things about Ginny but wht to do......Loving constraint restricted me...he he he....towards Hermoine. As you posted the reference from the book that Harry feels/treats Hermoine as his sister, that is the place where i was devastated. I dont have words at all. I was just dumb struck. When I was reading the series, I got the 5th book wrong one, and when I started reading it, I felt soo different from the original one, coz there in that book the unknown-authour wrote Harry/Hermoine 's love, relationship. Might be it made me feel like that but still what all the things I listed down there in my previous post, they all seems like a person who loves's Harry can do it, for me.

Khushboo,  What all you said about Hermoine is correct, she is doing all the things and researching/colleting the information for not only Harry but for the sake of the entire Wizarding World. Harry needs a person some one like that in his life as his lifepartner , who can help him , who can stand by him in worst cases, who is having a very good knowledge which he needs, who cares for him, who can do things before he can think of asking that thing to do, whose brain and heart works when his own stops working(coz of the terrific things happening around him or by the ppl who made his brain not to work). So, the qualities which Harry needs in his LifePartner are all in Hermoine. So, again my conclusion is Harry/Hermoine forever and ever and ever.

If feel like JKR wanted to give Harry a family , a family which he craves for , a family which he sees and thinks of having such a family for him, a family where the mother whould be like Mrs.Weasley. So, by having all this in mind , JKR might have thought of giving Harry the family which he wants and wants Harry to be related to tht family in some means.....which ultimately turns into Harry/Ginny pair. Otherwise it wont happen ....right!!!!!!

If Harry/Hermoine becomes a pair, there wont be any family relationship with the Weasley's. Other chances which ultimately reaches the same point is Harry/Luna (cant imagine), Harry/Cho (huh!!! Forget it).
 
Hi Nandoo,
Course you can call me Lalli!Big smile My friend's cousin's name is Lalitha as well and everyone calls her Lalli.
 
I bolded one of the parts you wrote, because it's so true. JKR herself wrote that though Harry was an orphan, she wanted a 'family' for him throughout the series: someone who would support him throughout. However, that's not the only reason Harry had attractions for Ginny. Ginny was one of those immature flirty fan girls in the first two books, but as the books went on, she grew up along with Harry. She was less tense around him and became more friendly, more understanding of the boy who was Harry Potter and not the 'Boy who Lived'. She saw Harry for who he was, his personality, and she came to love him for his character, not his fame. She changed from a 'fan girl' to a valuable friend who stuck with Harry along with only a handful of others throughout the books. Ginny's change was what attracted her to Harry. He never before saw Ginny other than "Ron's little sister", but once she became her own person and did things which made her stick out, Harry came to love her for her personality.
 
I agree. If JKR had wanted Harry to end up with Hermione, she would have added romance into his interactions with her, but that would leave poor Ron out, wouldn't it?Wink And Ron and Hermione are such a sweet couple in my opinion. They were annoying at first, but I came to love their coupling in the 5th book.Of course, it's completely your opinion that you think Harry/Hermione are the best couple, and we respect that.Smile
I do agree strongly with you that Harry/Luna and Harry/Cho (Dead) would not have been good. If Harry had not ended up with Ginny (who is my first choice for him), I'd much rather Hermione that Luna or Cho. (Not that I don't like Luna; she's just another sister figure. and I dispise Cho.)
ElusiveDevotion IF-Dazzler
ElusiveDevotion
ElusiveDevotion

Joined: 21 March 2008
Posts: 2614

Posted: 07 May 2009 at 3:29pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Nandoo

Hey Lalitha and Khushboo ......

First of all Iam damn happy to see lovely ppl around here and to my surprise , both of your names relates to me in a loving way ....u knw....Lalitha is my sweet cousin's name , I call her Lalli( if u love it and permit me...thn i wanna call u wid tht name.....if u just likes it...otherwise no problem...) and Khushboo....my good friend from my schooling....(i just dont wnt to tell u wht i call her when we both fight.....i guess u might have got it.... :) :) JK JK )
Khushboo,  What all you said about Hermoine is correct, she is doing all the things and researching/colleting the information for not only Harry but for the sake of the entire Wizarding World. Harry needs a person some one like that in his life as his lifepartner , who can help him , who can stand by him in worst cases, who is having a very good knowledge which he needs, who cares for him, who can do things before he can think of asking that thing to do, whose brain and heart works when his own stops working(coz of the terrific things happening around him or by the ppl who made his brain not to work). So, the qualities which Harry needs in his LifePartner are all in Hermoine. So, again my conclusion is Harry/Hermoine forever and ever and ever.

Aww that's niceSmile...and hehehehe I got itWink well that's what my friend threatens to call me when we fightLOL. About Harry-Hermione, I would like to say that doesn't what you said about them sound way too idealistic?Wink Sure, they are great friends but when you want roses you gotta accept the thorns. Think about this, even if Hermione helps Harry a LOT, does everything for him, IS he ready to accept her the way she is? (considering that he hates it when Hermione starts arguing or when her nagging nature comes into play) In contrast, not only is Ron ready to accept her argumentative side, they actually enjoy bickering with each other. On the other hand, Harry accepts the weaknessess and short-tempered-ness of Ginny because when you are in love, your weakness actually become adorable to your lover (sounds weird but it's really true in real life). Not only Harry accepts Ginny the way she is, he actually loves her for it. He appreciates her qualities like how she does NOT cry or become weak in adversities (Hermione starts crying...not saying that it's a bad thing to show your weakness...it's just NOT what Harry wants in his romantic partner). So I love the idealistic stuff you said about H/Hr as a couple but think realistically: Now that Voldemort is destroyed, would Harry want Hermione as his wife in a domestic setting? Would their married life be successful? Would they be able to discuss important couple issues without hiding things from each other? If some blunder occurs, would Hermione have the guts to debate with Harry like she does with Ron, or would she be afraid of Harry's temper (we all know his temperLOL)
And like Lalitha said, you left out poor Ron hehe. If H/Hr had gotten together, what would he have done? His worst fears were Hermione loving Harry, and that was one of the reasons he left them in DH. If Ron's worst fears had come true, what would have happenned to him? Would he be able to live/love anymore, face life anymore alone, without his true love Hermione?Embarrassed
Anyway, I just gave some of my opinions. If you really love H/Hr as a couple, I totally respect your oipnion.EmbarrassedHug
ShadowKisses IF-Dazzler
ShadowKisses
ShadowKisses

Winner of KSBKBT Debate Champtionship 2
Joined: 26 June 2006
Posts: 4628

Posted: 22 May 2009 at 7:33pm | IP Logged
 
Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Okay, I have just referred to the "Excess of Phlegm" chapter and you're right. Hermione does not call Fleur 'Phlegm", but she agreed with whatver Ginny said, which is just as "bad".

The least that can be said is that Hermione is still less of the person to be at blame which doesn't completely reduce blame, but doesn't quite portray her to be as petty as Ginny either since Harry too agrees with Ginny's assessment of Fleur's character. Getting back to the point - Ginny mocks her future sister-in-law which does not reflect maturity. Not only is it puerile to mock someone because of their difficulties with language barriers, it is downright cruel to mock a guest.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

And seriously, how many 15 year old girls do you know are not immature? 

Some members here brought up that she was mature - I was refuting that.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

I can honestly understand how Ginny and Hermione felt. At the age of 15, I too would not like people talking to me like I was a five year old, and there's never a rule anywhere that one must love their sister-in-law, especially someone stuck up like Fleur. And if everyone who "mocks" their sister-in-law is a mary-sue, I suppose the majority of us in this world are mary-sues. It seems to me that the word "mary-sue" is being over-used way too much these days. Personally, I don't feel that JK Rowling created any Mary-Sue characters in her series. Of course, not all of us will like all of them. Rowling created a vast amount of characters for people to like or dislike, but none of them are mary-sues, and calling Ginny, who is far from a mary-sue character contrary to what you wrote, would be insulting Rowling's inteligence. Honestly, I do not find this passage of Ginny's behaviour to Fleir (which reflects the behavior of many if not most 15 year old girls: not everyone is like Hermione) as a "mean-streak".  

 And yet, you admitted that Hermione's behaviour was bad as she was agreeing with Ginny. Hence, it can be concluded that Ginny's behaviour is worse.

Ginny's treatment of Fleur had nothing to do with Fleur treating Ginny like a "five year old" ? If you have a passage that shows Fleur stating such a thing, please provide it. Mind, I'm not talking about Ginny's version of the issue, as that is undoubtedly biased but the factual event itself. Not what JKR tells but what she shows. What Rowling shows is: "I suppose you like the way Phlegm says "'Arry," do you?' asked Ginny scornfully". What did Fleur ever do to receive this treatment? That she acts arrogant? That she is more beautiful than Ginny is? Even if Fleur is arrogant (this isn't shown in HBP), she is a guest in the Weasley home and her future sister-in-law, to boot. Ginny becomes petty over potential competition.

I'm having difficulty seeing how you can't see her ever-so-clear mean streak. I think that's being a tad duplicitous. A bit on yours and a bit on JKR's part. People can't call Luna "Loony" because that's rude but Ginny can call Fleur "Phlegm" but her behaviour is absolutely okay because it is "normal"? When Draco mocks Hermione and later calls her a mudblood, he's hexed. I've never seen ANY consequences for Ginny's actions against others (Same with most of the other Gryffindors ? they seem to defy karma). This is most evident in the scene where Ginny deliberately crashes into the podium at the game and the severe McGonagall doesn't so much as take of a few house points or give her detention for her less than sportsmanlike actions. That's what provides Ginny with her Mary Sue like attributes. It isn't because she mocks her sister that she is a Mary Sue ? it's that she gets away with mocking others when other characters (especially those from other houses) have to suffer consequences for their actions. Point in fact: Molly treats Fleur with contempt but later, is forced to eat her words and yet, Ginny, who was bashing Fleur for all she was worth, gets away without so much as a sorry. The other reasons Ginny is a Mary Sue is because she is the super cool girl who attracts the attention of all boys ref. HBP scene wherein Pansy tells us that even Blaise who is "hard to please" finds "the blood traitor" attractive. She is suddenly ZOMG! AMAZING at Quidditch, has been playing it since she was 6 even though the regular kids wouldn't be able to tell a proper lie at that age.  She is Tonks protg. She isn't above disrespecting Hermione or her brother without facing any consequence when Harry has told people off for talking to either Ron or Hermione that way in earlier books. That JKR intended for Ginny to be loved by her readers is another point for the Mary Sue tick sheet. Ginny is Ms. Popularity. Her "bat-bogey" hex is regarded as something of a wonder. Everyone is supposed to fear it. Mary Sue often have a fiery temper; she'll generally be cheerful, cool, not taking nonsense from anyone, telling people off, people who normally wouldn't put up with such disgusting behaviour and she'll be praised for all of this. Ginny fits the category. Moreover, Mary Sue is physically striking ? see numerous references to Ginny's red hair etc. I never said she had to love her sister-in-law ? obviously, she doesn't but would showing a little respect for her future sister-in-law, when Ginny's hypocritical self lectures others not to call Luna names, kill her? How is Ginny, who treats her future sister-in-law with such infantile behaviour, any better than the people who call Luna "Loony"? Conclusion: She isn't. She is worse because a) she's never called out on her terrible behaviour/ faces no consequences for her actions and b) her hypocrisy is never pointed out. 

Even if a lot of girls have this kind of behaviour as you claim ? it doesn't make it any more attractive or acceptable of a trait. That's equivalent of saying that because trillions of flies are attracted to garbage, garbage must be the best food of all.

If this is insulting JKR's 'intelligence', then so be it. I'm not above pointing the clear flaws I see in her writing (keep in mind this is four years of being with a stringent English professor talking). I've praised JKR when the occasion asked for it ? I thought her first three books were well-written, concise and clever. When her editors stopped doing their jobs, her writing started becoming less concise ergo, the plot-holes and Mary Sue. Her syntax and punctuation has also deteriorated over the years. Example: "Branches caught at Harry's hair and robes, but he lay quiescent, his mouth lolling open, his eyes shut, and in the darkness, while the Death Eaters crowed all around them, and while Hagrid sobbed blindly, nobody looked to see whether a pulse beat in the exposed neck of Harry Potter?" The sentence is what is called a "run-on" sentence. In writing, run-on sentences are to be avoided like the plague. Furthermore, "quiescent" is an adjective, "quiescently" is an adverb. This means that the phrase should either have been something to the effect: he lay quiescently or he was quiescent. The point of the above example isn't to illustrate that JKR is a bad writer ? but she has made some typical errors in writing as the series progressed, which her editors surprisingly missed. 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

And here comes the discussion on which is worse: death or torture, which is a highly opinionated argument. While Harry's sectumsempra could have killed Malfoy, Malfoy's crucio could have caused Harry pain beyond anything he felt before. And saying Malfoy's crucio "may not have worked" is the same as saying "Harry did not know what the sectumsempra did". Both were on equal ground on this one. Whether or not it may have worked, Malfoy was going to use crucio, and whether or not Harry did or did not know what the sectumsempra curse did, he did use it, and both were properly punished. 
 
Not even bringing the debate of death/torture here. It was not the point of what was said. That there is a possibility that Draco's Crucio wouldn't have worked not the same as saying Harry was as nave about Sectumsempra as you are making him out to be. He was aware that the Prince's work was shady, due in no small amount to Hermione's warnings. This isn't based on if Draco was or wasn't privy to his own strength; rather, it is based on knowing his psyche. That Harry uses "Sectumsempra" is rather telling, if nothing. "Sectus" meaning to cut, "semper" meaning always. Crucio ? as in "crucifixion" which is a biblical allusion to the crucifixion of JC ? implying torment and agony which would be suffered in equal parts by the castor and the victim (refer to GOF chapter regarding the UCs) however, not "always torment".

Properly punished? Not even close.  For nearly killing another student, Harry is merely given detentions. He should have been expelled or thrown in Azkaban for a while for attempted murder. That Rowling herself doesn't realize the GRAVITY of what Harry has done is rather disappointing. And how can I state definitively that she doesn't realize it?  Harry's guilt over nearly killing Draco lasted until he realized he got detention. Isn't that ever so pleasant? /end sarcasm. Straying a tad away from topic: Malfoy's attempt at a Crucio results in a near death experience ? an experience you claim was "properly" punished by a near death experience yet when Harry does the exact SAME thing, even taking it a step further by actually performing a successful Crucio ? he's praised for it instead of being punished. Double standards, much? This hypocrisy dominates much of the later books. Whatever the Gryffindors do, regardless of whether the action itself is worthy of a Slytherin, they are praised for it instead of being condemned like the Slytherins would be. Case in point: Draco is 'evil' because he "bullies" Harry. James is good because he "sticks up" for people against Snape. Umbridge is racist since she thinks that because Hagrid is a half-giant, he is a bad teacher. Harry, Ron and Hermione treat the full giants with patronizing contempt and this is a sign that they are really great people. Draco is a git for treating Hagrid with contempt for his half-giant status but Hagrid's racist comment to Flich "I'm a ruddy teacher, aren' I, yeh sneakin' Squib!" said Hagrid, firing up at once." is an example of how amazing a person Hagrid is.  Voldemort hates Muggles because he's evil. All other Wizards (the Weasley family) talk about Muggles as "insane" and belittle their lifestyle but that's okay because they are carelessly endearing about it. Snape is a git for calling Hermione a "know-it-all" who he implies actually knows nothing but when Ginny disparages Hermione for her supposed lack of knowledge of Quidditch, it is okay because Hermione was overbearing, as though she never does that when Snape is around. Do you really want me to go on with listing the numerous double standards in the series? Because I honestly can. Not only does the above reflect a simplistic value system but is a testament to the fact that we, as the readers, are clearly not meant to ponder the nature of good and evil. Good is good, evil is evil. No matter what happens.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

If you think of it in that way, then who is to say Harry is at fault at all, because he did not know the consequences of sectumsempra? 

As castor of the curse, Harry will be at fault logically. That he was unaware of the consequences of Sectumsempra reflects his stupidity and irresponsibility not that he wasn't at fault for what happened. Since he uttered the curse, his magic was used to cause harm; he is at fault for what happened. This is simple logic. Positing a scenario: I throw something at you because you are in the process of throwing a book at me. The object, which happens to be a pencil, takes your eye out. I would still be at fault. Why? Because I threw the pencil.  That I didn't know what a pencil or the unknown object could do is irresponsibility on my part. My irresponsibility, however, does not nullify my action or shift the blame.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

And Harry was also aware that without the Prince's instructions, Ron would not be alive. So what kind of person would let go of a book that saved his friend's life, even if it had one curse that wasn't exactly a good one? 

As far as I can remember, it wasn't the Prince's instructions that saved Ron. It was what Harry remembered from the first lesson of Potions that saved Ron. I'll comment properly on this once I can locate the chapter and find the relevant excerpts. 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

How did Harry not do any work? Like I said, he did not simply "conjure" his potions. He worked just as hard as Hermione to make it. He simply followed different instructions, and it says many times in the book that without Snape's unnerving presence, Harry fared far better in Potions than before, proving that he had skill which had been supressed by Snape's bullying comments in the past, and had that skill been nurtured (he did inherit skill in Potions from his mother Lily), he would have been just as good as Hermione.

"Inherited"? If the trait was "inherited" ? why did he need the Prince's useful tips? And yes, it would be considered academically unethical. Because of the fact that he had more of an advantage over the other kids. So, yes, Hermione was right in rebuking him. He did not work hard to achieve this knowledge.  If Harry is as great at potions as you are making him out to be, why did he need to drag Ron all the way to Slughorn's office to have an antidote made for Ron? Harry sucks at potions, Snape notwithstanding. The only way he prospered is through the Prince's instructions, not his own knowledge. It's kind of like using a graphing calculator for mathematical questions which ask that you use regular calculators. If I were to use the graphing calculator for this, I would then simply be using a different calculator but this calculator wrongfully gives me an advantage over the other students. Academic dishonesty? Definitely the case!

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

and neither was Ginny's, contrary to what you interpret her behavior as;

Hermione's behaviour was borne out of insecurity as you stated in the post prior to this, not because of malicious intent ("It just irked her that for once, someone other than her got the fame in class"). On the contrary, for Ginny:

Consider

1. Snape calling Hermione an "insufferable know-it-all", insinuating that she really doesn't know anything at all.

2. Ginny telling Hermione, out of nowhere, that Hermione shouldn't think she knows anything about Quidditch.

In scenario one, Snape is called a git for acting this way yet I don't see anyone rushing to call Ginny out on her actions. Also, Snape isn't Hermione's friend so his comments are less valued to Hermione than Ginny, who we are told is Hermione's friend. I'll be the first to say that Hermione is a hypocrite a lot of the times. However, that quality does not negate her insecurity about what she doesn't know. That Ginny digs at her insecurity when the opportunity shows up is malicious (much like Snape's offhanded comment), especially since Ginny is supposed to be her friend.  I'd decry that Ginny's behaviour is worthy of a Slytherin but gah, even Slytherins are better than that. Even Malfoy, who is supposed to be this humongous git, doesn't target Hermione's insecurity, instead belittling her heritage ? something she is proud of. Furthermore, it's not that Ginny defends someone she likes that reflects her mean-spiritedness. It's how she chooses to react. Instead of actually defending Harry, she attacks Hermione's insecurities (ad hominem). THAT is mean-spirited.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

 while Hermione was sticking up for "academic integrity" and "Harry's wrongfulness after Harry was told about his punishment which really did stink", Ginny stuck up for him as any friend would. She told Hermione that Harry knew what he did was wrong, and he was bring punished for it, and it irked her that Hermione suddenly acted as if she was interested in Quidditch when she never showed that much interest before.

 
In my post to shellyt, I've efficiently demonstrated that Ginny wasn't all that into Quidditch before OOTP whereas Hermione showed enthusiasm. Hermione, who Ginny claimed knew embarrassingly little about Quidditch, was in fact one of the most enthusiastic participants during the World Quidditch Cup Tournament. Her excitement was demonstrated when she claimed something to the effect that if Harry was going to enjoy the game, he shouldn't watch it slowly while cheering when Troy or someone from the team scored. Ginny's enthusiasm (if it ever existed) was not shown.  
 
Ginny does not mention ANYWHERE that what Harry did was wrong. She says it was "good". Neither does she mention that he was being punished for it. 
 
It would be malicious because Ginny, who is apparently close to Hermione, would know her insecurities. Hermione is extremely insecure about not knowing something. For Ginny to throw that back in her face is in fact, spiteful.  

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Honestly, I would have acted the same if I was Ginny, and if you want to call me malicious for that, then fine. 

I have no intention of disparaging your behaviour. How you act on your own time is hardly any of my business ;) I have no authority over how you chose to act; however, I do have the right to criticize a modern writer's writing prowess. 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Neither Harry, Ron, Hermione, Neville, or Ginny were the same as they were in the previous books. It's called growing up, and there are some things about all of them that are improvements, and some things that are not very likeable, but that's how Rowling wanted her characters to end up like and we should accept and like them for that, despite their faults.
 

So you're trying to tell me that the Ginny from the earlier books is the one that is shown after GOF? Hogwash. The Ginny before stuttered & blushed YET, managed to assert herself (see the scene in GOF where she unsuccessfully rebukes Ron for making fun of Neville). She acts clumsy. She had flaws. She drove Ron mad by talking a lot. She wasn't the strongest "bat-bogey" hex thrower. The Ginny before wasn't Quidditch Queen Bee. She was "horrified" by the thought of Aiden Lynch being hurt; she was polite while her brothers were rude. The Ginny now is an anti-thesis of the Ginny before. There are SO many more inconsistencies in her character that simply can't be explained by "growing up". "Growing up" does not encompass a personality transplant. Ginny's apparent personality transplant wouldn't be so jarring had it occurred in B3 as that could have be attributed to her experience with LV. However, since it didn't, it is conclusive for me to attribute such jarring differences in her character to poor writing.

On the point of Ron: I adored him like you wouldn't believe in PS because he was a strategist ? a clever one at that. Yes, he had odd quirks but he wasn't stupid, selfish or churlish. He was endearing. It was only when JKR reduced his character to comic relief AKA Rupert Grint and being a side-kick to Harry (pretty much every book after PS) that I stopped liking him. I don't call Ron becoming the insignia of all that is comical, rude, and selfish growing up. I call that character degeneration. His character degeneration goes to prove that the strategist in Ron was a plot mechanism or more rightly, dues ex machina. Although I still like Hermione's character to a tiny extent, I no longer find her to be as engaging as I thought she was in PoA or even GoF. Her conjuring canaries or something equally ridiculous in HBP broke the proverbial straw on the camels' back.

The following paragraph is very subjective so take it with a grain of salt: On Neville ? he rocks. I can't say I've liked another HP character as much after the glorious dump of plot conveniences that was Deathly Hollow (and yes, that is misspelt on purpose). Neville stood up to the Death Eaters. Stood up. Not threw a tantrum at which seems to be the best our so-called "hero" can manage. No wonder LV didn't mark Neville as his opponent. He knew he'd be surpassed. Neville is the only character who can be put under the category of "growing up". Can we please label him the Unsung Hero :P? He is all sorts of awesome that Harry isn't ;). Throw in Narcissa for good measure. Even thought JKR tells the readers that Narcissa is a horribly elitist woman, who looked "as if she had dung under her nose", Narcissa's concern for her son is astounding. Narcissa as a mother wins over Molly, who is much nicer to Harry than she is to her own kids a lot of the time (refer to the robe scene in GOF). Narcissa is also a better mother than Lily who cheerfully watches her son go to his death even though she sacrificed her life for him to be safe. Anyhow, this is neither here nor there; just something I'd like to point out since you brought up the point of character development.

I'm sorry but I'm not the sort of person who takes kindly to popular authors taking liberties with their own characters when a lot of fan fiction writers do a better job of keeping in character with both original characters and characters that are penned by JKR (See atruwriter of FF.net for one such example). I'm not going to quietly accept something that defies logic because the author intended for it to be so. If you are, good for you. However, I feel the need to point out where the writer went wrong because I like to analyze what I'm reading rather than simply accepting whatever the writer cooks up because it is apparently "her story".  Merely because she authored the idea doesn't mean she is immune to making mistakes.

 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

That's just the thing. Every other word coming from Ginny's mouth isn't "insulting humor". You conveniently forget all the kind and compassionate comments Ginny makes, which are the prime reason Ginny fans love her. And it'll take me some time to come up with the "mean" comments by Hermione and "nice" comments by Ginny, but I'll post them later as I don't have my books near me.  

Until you point out the scenes, I'm going to let it stand as it is. While on this point, I'll also clarify something/ back-peddle to something I glossed over: Ginny's humour isn't always insulting (even though every other comment from her IS insulting "humour") - I actually found her comment regarding Harry's tattoo to be entertaining ? but the nice sides of her personality are so far in between. We are never *shown* her pleasant personality. We are *told* she's nice but what JKR *shows* contradicts that. *Showing*, being a more effective literary device than *telling*, takes precedence in character analysis. As a result, any interaction wherein Ginny is nice (where she is genuinely shown to be compassionate not only to people she likes but others as well) is too little, too late.  

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Which she did not need to do. Harry already was "chastized" by Snape and McGonagall, and he was getting a punishment which rightfully would make him see the wrong he did. Quidditch was one of the things Harry loved the best, and de-captaining him was a fitting punishment. What "right" did Hermione then have to chastize him when he was already feeling terrible? Haven't you ever realized that Ron was a better friend to Harry during these times, because though he did not "support" his actions, he sympathized with his friend, and Hermione failed to do this a lot of places in the book. 

Let's get this straight then. For killing someone, people (regular ones mind you, not extra-special Goody-goody Gryffindor) end up Azkaban. But for attempting to kill, taking away the permission to ride on a broomstick is something of a great punishment? I think nearly killing someone deserves chastisement. Ron would be the worse friend because as Edmund Burke said 'All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing'. Ron's passivity in regards to Harry nearly killing someone reflects less care and concern than Hermione's reprimand. And why doesn't Hermione have the right to rebuke Harry for his actions? She has practically been his family, his support system for years, even when Ron abandoned Harry's side for a petty argument in GOF. In case you forgot, HARRY NEARLY KILLED SOMEONE. Supporting a friend in what they do wrong is possibly one of the worst things that an individual could do. 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Of course Harry is grateful for it. She's the only one sympathizing with him. That doesn't mean it isn't her 'fault'. 

Actually, it does because flaws are characterized by the categories of observer and that no one really points out Ginny's attitude is a testament to the fact that JKR herself doesn't recognize it. Yes, she loses her temper; but it is always justified because she's either "defending" Harry or people she likes. Since her "flaw" is justified, her "flaw" isn't a character flaw. It's a virtue.

 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Actually, I've read in an interview of Rowling's that Ginny's biggest flaw was her strong reaction against people who angered her (as demonstrated by the Zacharias Smith passage you gave us), therefore telling us that Ginny had a quick temper and often acted before she thought. But there are places in the books where Ginny regrets her behavior, and other characters, mostly her mother or father, scold her for it. Ginny is not without her share of scoldings, and I have no clue how you came to surmise that she was never scolded for her behavior. 

 

 Yes, Molly tells her to stop but does Ginny stop calling Fleur names behind her back? No. This implies that JKR doesn't believe there is anything wrong with Ginny's behaviour which is congruent with what she has stated in her interviews. Addressed the point regarding her temper in Mary Sue explanation.  Also, if you could list some of her "scoldings" ? I'd be ever so grateful.  Her strong reaction would be a flaw ? if it were treated like one. However, it isn't treated like a flaw. Her strong reaction is something that Harry and later, Luna, find amusing. McGonagall doesn't chastise her for her strong reaction when if it were anyone else, they'd be receiving detentions. For a flaw to actually BE a flaw, it must be TREATED and portrayed as a flaw, not a good quality. Flaws which are shown to be assets aren't flaws. They are pseudo-flaws, another thing that is hallmark Mary Sue.

 

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Like you said above, 'could' is the magic word here. If Malfoy is to be let off for almost cruciating Harry, why can't Ginny be for what she did to Zacharias Smith? Malfoy "could" have tortured Harry with pain beyond anything and Ginny "could" have hurt Smith further. If you dont mind me saying, you seem to be a bit biased when it comes to Malfoy or other Slytherins versus Harry, Ginny, or the others. 

While I wouldn't say I'm biased towards the Slytherins (I  dislike their canon personalities) - I do tend to stick up for them because they are the ones that suffer the most brow-beating both from the author (I've seen fan fiction authors do more justice to Blaise, Pansy, Michael, Dean, Cho, Fleur, Draco, Bellatrix, Lucius, Adrian, Marcus, Theodore etc) and from other fans who believe Gryffindor can do no wrong even when they act in a manner that is the same as that of the "evil characters". In so far as I can conclude from what I have observed, other fans tend to dislike them mostly because they are so underdeveloped and they are only offered Harry's (alias JKR) "insight" into these characters, which basically includes Harry moaning about how terrible, how ugly, how arrogant, how elitist they are without truly delving into their character. I attribute much of this hatred to the authorial intent as the text on Rowling's website is less than kind when talking about the Slytherins. The impression that her writing plus her answers reflect is that the only reason the aforementioned characters serve is to act as the bad guys without much reasoning behind it. I also tend to stick up for the Slytherins and other "Evil" characters because of JKR's contradictory values and messages: her "Good" characters behave in much the same way as her "Evil" characters, except for the fact that everything that is a sign of an evil character's evilness is a symbol of the good character's goodness.

Ginny can't be "let off" for her actions because she acted ? Malfoy didn't. He was going to ? he intended to ? but he didn't act. Ginny acted. Violently. Caused harm. Got away with it. Like a "good" Gryffindor. See the world of a difference? Compare Hamlet (before act 5) and Macbeth. Hamlet did not act. Hence, his intention to kill Claudius (Act 3) would not require letting him off the hook. Macbeth acted (Act 2). His ACTIONS would require being either "let off" the hook (as he wasn't), or being put on it (as he rightly was, Act 5). Thoughts ? words ? deeds. Deeds and words are punishable. Not thoughts.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Actually, Zacharias was just as much of a git as Malfoy. If you remember the things he said in the 5th and 6th books, he was not a very nice person, and seriously, Ginny only slammed him into the podium. And that was as a punishment for being smart alecky and rude to the others in Dumbledore's Army. I really don't think she would have caused him more damage. She was not a violent person after all (though you may think she is). 

I disagree. He is a git for asking questions? For not believing the Prophet blindly? For daring to doubt the truthfulness in the words of one Harry Potter? Zacharias was NEVER as much an ass as Malfoy who was firmly grounded in elitism. Zacharias isn't a "nice" person for what? For asking questions regarding the validity when the whole Wizarding world was in turmoil regarding the rise of LV? You pointed out he wasn't a "very nice person" and Ginny is a nice person for calling Fleur "phlegm"? Right and pigs can fly. I'll be the first to say that he was being somewhat maddening during the match (Admittedly, I liked his commentary though because *finally* someone was dishing to the Gryffindors what they'd been dishing out all these previous years; giving them a taste of their own medicine, so to speak). However, he was no more obnoxious than Jordan was during the previous matches; in fact, he was even less rude. For instance, Chapter 15 in POA reads "Lee swore so badly that Professor McGonagall tried to tug the magical megaphone away from him" whereas HBP Chapter 14 reads "Well, there they go, and I think we're all surprised to see the team that Potter's put together this year. Many thought, given Ronald Weasley's patchy performance as Keeper last year, that he might be off the team, but of course, a close personal friendship with the Captain does help". Does being mildly annoying warrant broom-ramming and being hexed? Certainly not! I don't see why Ginny or any of the other Gryffindors would have to resort to violence to release aggravation on something that wasn't mere speculation for Ron's friendship with Harry did help him get on the team. I don't dislike Ginny for reacting, I dislike how she reacted and how she was let scot-free when anyone else would have been rebuked.

Smith is being smart-alecky when he says "?Coote isn't really the usual build for a Beater," said Zacharias loftily, "they've generally got a bit more muscle ?" but of course, Jordan's "And here come the Slytherin team, led by Captain Flint. He's made some changes in the line-up and seems to be going for size rather than skill--" More boos from the Slytherin crowd. Harry, however, thought that Lee had a point. Malfoy was the smallest person on the Slytherin team; the rest were enormous" is matter-of-fact and not at all smart-alecky. There isn't much of a difference in what they point out. So, why is it that Jordan can get away with it but Smith must be "punished"?  

Also, Ginny didn't just "slam him into the podium", "the Gryffindor team landed beside the wreckage of wood under which Zacharias was feebly stirring". So, he would have suffered a fall from the top box to the bottom of the pitch. I don't know about you but I play sports and if anyone from my team had done that, I'd be shamed. 

"Punishment for being smart alecky and rude to others" ? what makes Ginny the judge of authorizing punishment for being rude when she clearly is so rude to her future sister-in-law (calling her "phlegm", making retching noises behind her back)? I'm sorry but I think you are being extremely disingenuous. Smith's commentary wasn't any worse than Jordan's commentary the previous years and yet, we didn't see any of the Slytherins ramming into him. If a Slytherin had done the same thing and barrelled right into Jordan, they would've been punished but since Ginny Mary Sue Weasley does it ? it is "punishment" for being "rude"? And "rude" is when Zacharias points out, in a sarcastic tone, the emotional politics (Cormac should have been playing instead of Ron) that did indeed rule who was chosen for the Gryffindor team  when for a larger part of the previous years, the Gryffindor commentator was PRAISED by the team mates for tearing apart the Slytherins? Guess the taste of your own medicine is not so sweet, after all.

 
What about the instances when Ginny's been downright rude? To Fleur, To Hermione, To Ron? Why is she not "punished" for being smart alecky and rude to others? Applying your reasoning, she definitely deserves to be. Ginny picks on the insecurities of other people. Hermione's insecurity regarding what she doesn't know. Ron's lack of sexual prowess. And she uses these insecurities to her advantage in an argument. That is unpleasant.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

So being beautiful and cool is a Mary Sue quality? And about Isabella Swan: I don't understand why eveyone thinks her only quality is her clutziness. It's not. Bella has many faults, the foremost being her complete dependence on one man and her selfish inconsideration when it comes to the feelings of other (aka Jacob Black). I do not consider being klutzy, being beautiful, or things like that "flaws". Those are characteristics people are born with. Flaws are characteristics people develop. And the reason I strongly dislike Bella Swan's character is not because she's a "Mary-Sue" (because she's far from a Mary-Sue). It's because her dependence on Edward, her inablitiy to make any choices herself, and her selfishness do not make her very likeable to me.

See I know that. What MAKES her Mary Sue is that all the flaws you've listed above are NEVER made out to be flaws. They are things to be cherished, virtues if you willNothing except her clumsiness is considered to be a flaw by authorial intent or by other characters. If readers are the only observers, then yes, it counts as Mary Sue.

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

That's completely my opinon, so I don't state this as a fact, but as my opinion. I know some people who find these qualities in Bella "endearing (eurgh)", but that's their own opinion, and I suppose I respect them for that. Same with Ginny. I find her a very flawed character, and her flaws are acknowledged both by the author and many of her fans. 

Like stated above - Flaw is observed by three categories of observer: other characters, author, reader. Other characters seldom find flaws in Ginny. When they do (a la Ron), they are always put down even though if anyone else was doing this, they'd react differently. Also, the people who point out flaws in Ginny are wrong for their accusations (a la Ron, again). If a character flaw isn't portrayed as a flaw - if it is justified - then, it isn't a flaw. THIS is why people label rightly Bella Swan a "Mary Sue".

Originally posted by _LalithaJanaki_

Interpretation actually is related to our feelings, because what we feel motivates many of our actions. No one is completely "un-biased" when analyzing someone or something. Their "feeling" always comes in the way, whether they acknowledge it or not. And the way in which their feeling works motivates the way in which they interpret things. If not, why do people interpret different from each other if their feelings don't come into consideration?

Not everyone works that way. I am objective and I do take offense that you think my "feelings" somehow hinder my analysis of her character which I think is mostly free of bias. I'm don't know about you but in anthropology we are taught to be objective and I do believe that had I not liked Zacharias I would come to the same conclusion. Rationally speaking, I think you're being subjective and displaying what one literary critic terms the "Potterian doublethink" in your analysis of Ginny, excusing her actions when if they were to be done by another character, you wouldn't excuse them. I'm not saying that my opinion has more truth in it than yours. I'm merely stating that my conclusion of Ginny's character is not subjective. Fact is ? not all interpretations are subjective ? mine certainly isn't and I'm going to rest my case with that. Also, apologies for the very late reply =( It wasn't my intention to keep the discussion at stalemate for so long.



Edited by ShadowKisses - 27 May 2009 at 5:16pm

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

ProdigalStudentBeyond_the_Veil

Tani91 IF-Sizzlerz
Tani91
Tani91

Joined: 30 December 2004
Posts: 22620

Posted: 23 May 2009 at 10:47am | IP Logged
^really great argument
 
but one thing I'd like to say...your argument about Gryffindors not getting penalized for their so called "arrogant" behavior.. JKR's writing is SUBJECTIVE towards the good people/characters in the book (aka Gryffindors) so obviously she will not create situtions in which Gryfindors are penalized...in a real world yes their actions would deserve severe punishments(esp Harry's use of Sectumsempra on Malfoy) BUT you must remember that HP was first wirrten as a children's book in mind..and one thing that is always relevant in a children's book is that good triumphs over evil...so unconsciously the readers dont penalize Ginny or Lee or Harry's actions simply because they represent the good side...and always take thir(meaning Ginny calling Fleur "phlegm" and running into Smith and Jordan's random commentary) as hysterical and not demoralizing.
 
 
and anywas this is a work of FANTASY FICIOTN written for children(well initially)....and JKR created it wonderfully so lets not spoil it by cover analyzing it and degrading the caracters because millions of HP fans love them the way they are!
 
just my two cents...no offence intended
SitaLakshmi Groupbie
SitaLakshmi
SitaLakshmi

Joined: 15 September 2008
Posts: 148

Posted: 23 May 2009 at 7:58pm | IP Logged
I love Ginny! She's one of the best characters in the series!

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

guju_girl1

premsONLYmine Goldie
premsONLYmine
premsONLYmine

Joined: 29 November 2008
Posts: 1090

Posted: 24 May 2009 at 6:18am | IP Logged
they can be a couple lol you dont know

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Author Replies Views Last Post
HARRY-GINNY fanfic IS THIS LOVE?

2 3 4 5 6

Author: Adwaita   Replies: 43   Views: 5374

Adwaita 43 5374 14 June 2009 at 6:47am by Adwaita
Luna Lovegood or Ginny Weasley?

2 3 4

Author: cityoflights   Replies: 31   Views: 3118

cityoflights 31 3118 25 January 2009 at 10:32am by Ahlaam5
fav.HP couple/would like see as a couple

Author: pricey28   Replies: 8   Views: 915

pricey28 8 915 01 August 2007 at 1:40am by AY_candy_luver
GINNY/HARRY OR LUNA/HARRY

2

Author: sumbulmashluvs   Replies: 14   Views: 3138

sumbulmashluvs 14 3138 10 July 2006 at 10:49am by jayanti_dj
Harry Hermione OR Harry Ginny?

2

Author: Shining_Star   Replies: 10   Views: 4567

Shining_Star 10 4567 27 July 2005 at 7:57pm by Charmed1

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category / Channels
Forums

Harry Potter Topic Index

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.

Popular Channels :
Star Plus | Zee TV | Sony TV | Colors TV | SAB TV | Life OK

Quick Links :
Top 100 TV Celebrities | Top 100 Bollywood Celebs | About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Forum Index