hohaiyee: Tea that's yellow like butter within its cup, upon a maroon hued table, strewn with hot pink flowers shaped like stars (Default)
JK Rowling started writing the first Harry Potter book in 1991, and it was finally published in 1997, while in universe, it was still set in 1991. The second book was published in 1998, third in 1999, and the 4th in 2000. But then, the 5th book, which was huuuuge, was published in 2003 after a lapse of 3 years. The next two books were also spaced two years apart.

What this means is that while Harry Potter is the book many of us grow up reading, after Book 4, we are no longer growing up with the characters, the way it is with a yearly TV series like Buffy where in-universe time is pretty much the same as viewer's time. This might be less of a problem for much younger fans, or young fans who started late into the series, but I started reading Harry Potter when I was the same age as him. The 3 years difference meant that I was suddenly older than Harry's year, so instead of being interested in Harry's Year / Harry's Year, I was an Oliver/Percy shipper.

By the nature of the time difference, at the end of the series, I was feeling really gross out (and OLD) whenever the ickles teenagers kissing scenes came up in the book. Ickles Teenagers Kissing + even greater time difference of the movies is also why I would probably be soooo uncomfortable watching it (and not dislike, per se, but lack of interest once I found out there will be no Albus x Gellert in the movies).

Am I the only Older Harry Potter fan that feels this way? I don't think there is anything wrong or abnormal with teenagers being teenagers, but now that I'm not one anymore, it's gross. I'm sure the feeling is more than mutual, haha!

I like humour fics involving Harry's years, but even aged up, I prefer any non-platonic fics to be about the Marauder's Generation and older, like Albus x Gellert. Now that I'm old, it's hard to take "Harry's Year / Harry's Year is 20 + now blah blah blah" seriously when the most recent public images we have on their characters is by their babyfaced actors and actresses, yikes!
hohaiyee: Tea that's yellow like butter within its cup, upon a maroon hued table, strewn with hot pink flowers shaped like stars (Bloom)

Amber Benson by Luigi Novi (promoting Serpent's Storm on 2011, March 5th, at Midtown Comics Downtown) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:3.5.11AmberBensonByLuigiNovi1.png

I've always thought that Amber Benson (who played Tara Maclay on Buffy) was a look alike for young Albus. Her natural hair colour is actually auburn - brown with red hues. She is tall and willowy in built, with a long and slender face and features, except her eyes is more gray-blue than bright blue. Amber Benson is like, "beautiful in a bookish way":

63!Albus )

Her character's storyline in Buffy also have some parallel, albeit with the significant difference of her Family Burden being a family that was actually evil-controlling (keeping the family witches under the control of the patriarch with lies) instead of understandably needy controlling (need Albus to be home caring for Ariana). Tara's tragic romance was that the witch she fell in love with, Willow, was power-hungry and controlling, possessive of Tara as the object of affection to the point where Willow actually wiped Tara's memory of the fight they were having over Willow's overkill of power-use! I can't remember if she actually did it, but at one point, Willow suggest that they could look for Dawn easier if she could temporary spell everyone who was not in Dawn's age group to a different dimension.

...and then even if you are not a Buffy fan, you might know what happened next - Tara reconciled with Willow just in time to join the Dead Gays Club, something which drove Willow fully to the dark side, outrage ensued. Frankly, I wish they had gotten the Buffy-Angel treatment instead - eternally starcrossed due to one partner's evil baggage.

ETA I'm Under Your Spell )
hohaiyee: Tea that's yellow like butter within its cup, upon a maroon hued table, strewn with hot pink flowers shaped like stars (Default)
We read the Harry Potter series through Harry's eyes, and hear through him, Dumbledore's version of events. Repeatedly, Dumbledore had said, that love is the one thing that Voldemort could never understand...why?

Voldemort almost have no capacity for love at all, because he's a sociopath. Grindelwald on the other hand, was a psychopath. Threaten two children with fire to control them, and the sociopath will run away the first chance he gets - but he's never going to forget this, and from then on he's going to obsess over never being that powerless again. The psychopath on the other hand, he's going to stick his hand in the fire! - because he refuses to let that fire have power over him! Sirius Black, in his youth, was psychopathic - at least much more this than sociopathic. It wasn't that Sirius didn't love his friends, but that loving the ones they love won't stop a psychopath from hurting the ones they love, anymore than any fear of fire will stop them from sticking their hand in to Show It Who Is Boss.

Voldemort would have problems being redeemed by love - because he couldn't love when he couldn't trust, when Voldemort lives in fear, his name means running away from death. The closest thing Voldie has is Bellatrix, whose devotion was the closet thing Voldie had to a mother's unconditional love - unconditional offer of protection.

Grindelwald had a problem with being redeemed by love - because unfortunately love does not cancel out anger, not when someone had as poor impulse control as Gellert did when he got into that final fight with Alberforth (and when he got kicked out of Drumstrang, who probably went "It's one thing to learn and practice dark arts, it's quite another to run away with our dark impulses!").

Voldemort's problem is that he's always afraid, he never felt secure, Voldie is never ever going to mellow out.

Grindelwald on the other hand, could and did, 'mellow out with age'. I think, if there was never a three-way duel that ended in death, they really could have been happy, and if they have given it a decade, I think, Grindelwald being Grindelwald, would still wan to crucio Alberforth during a fight or kill his annoying brother-in-law - but would have learned the impulse control necessary to remember the long term gain of Not Upsetting Albus versus the short term satisfaction of following his rage.

Here is a short page on the difference between psychopath and sociopath:
http://helpingpsychology.com/sociopath-vs-psychopath-whats-the-difference

...but I do have to disagree with the general assessment that "psychopaths are charming because they could mimic emotions", I don't think it's necessary fake, that they hurt the ones they love is an attribute of poor impulse control. Ergo, a psychopath can be perfectly sincere at the moment where they profess that they love you and never want to hurt you - but that sincerity of love doesn't mean they are not dangerous.
hohaiyee: Tea that's yellow like butter within its cup, upon a maroon hued table, strewn with hot pink flowers shaped like stars (Default)
Typed in response to this:
http://guardians-song.livejournal.com/108716.html

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who compared "strange and dangerous" Ariana to Tom, but you and I have very different opinions on the two of them. I kinda like Albus, he's easier to like in spite of the many stupid things he's done when you remember the whole, pushed human being thing.

I don't think Albus had every made a sincere concrete effort to help Tom, from the moment he showed Tom magical might is right with the flaming wardrobe - when Tom was a 11 yr old kid who came to the orphanage with nothing, to that chilling moment when he told Harry to leave the baby because Nothing Can Be Done. Uh huh, just like nothing can be done about Harry having to live with the abusive Dursleys huh? God forbid you be wrong or try harder!

I find the way Albus, a full grown adult, treated Tom, the kid, as unforgivable and inexcusable - but it is understandable once you compare Tom to Ariana. Ariana went mad when all three of them, Ariana, Alberforth, and Albus, were kids, Ariana went mad and then the father was imprisoned. There are children who have survived terrible trauma and somehow retained sanity - Jaycee Dungard did. Considering how the senior Dumbledore went about revenge, and Albus's bout with Grindelwald, I think a certian amount of instability runs in the family, and Ariana's attack sets it off.

I think Albus was afraid of Ariana, the way Petunia was afraid of Harry. He was a good student but his sister was a dangerous freak, he does not say it to her face and he's probably ashame of thinking it, but he's afraid of her - madness is as unpredictable to Dumbledore as magic is to Petunia.

Both of Ariana and Tom's strange dangerousness stems from a very understandable thing - rage at previous helplessness. They feel like they could trust no one (though Ariana had the utter devotion of Alberforth) and that they will not be safe, they are angry at the world for letting them get hurt.

Ariana's father went to jail for her, what did her mother do?

Maybe that was what Ariana was thinking, even if she was not rational enough to be held responsible for it.

Maybe that's what Albus suspect of Ariana, they grew up together, and as Ray Bradbury noted in "The Veldt", children can be suspicious and feel irrationally, personally, persecuted. His sister took away his father, his mother, his future. The year Ariana died, she was 14 and Albus was 17? That would make Albus age 9 when his sister was attacked at age 4. His abandonment of Ariana that summer was the culmination of a decade of a child's fear and resentment. Then came the guilt, and still, fear. Tom Riddle was only an 11yr old little boy, but Albus Dumbledore was afraid of his darkness, and more suspicious of the harm that Tom could do, than concerned for Tom's welfare.

...and once again, instead of the leave baby Voldemort alone conclusion to the series, I wish that Harry and Ginny had adopted an orphaned child, and that our narrator Harry had better understanding of exactly how bad an environment Tom grew up in, and sought to prevent another Voldemort, wizard or muggle, by working for the welfare of vulnerable children, the ones in abusive homes like Harry, the ones in orphanage like Tom, the ones in the foster system. Then again, it could still happen, if JK Rowling can declare Dumbledore gay after the book is done, the same can be said of some of the listed children in the finale being adopted.

Plus, while the book is mostly in Harry's POV, and it is important for Dumbledore to tell him about how it's the choices people makes that determines light or dark, it'll be nice if there were more other POV on how the choices of other people affected Harry as well - if the Weasleys had not practically adopted Harry, would he have turned out like Tom Riddle, then Voldemort? I myself made conscious choices not to be a violent criminal - but my choices are influenced by what I was taught and what I learnt by example as a child - I looked out for some of my more vulnerable classmates because that's what I saw the teachers do for us, beyond duty.

Profile

hohaiyee: Tea that's yellow like butter within its cup, upon a maroon hued table, strewn with hot pink flowers shaped like stars (Default)
mercurial_g

May 2012

S M T W T F S
  12 345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 30th, 2025 05:54 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios