The Sword and Laser discussion
Scifi / Fantasy News
>
Rowlings' History of Magic in North America: tor.com's Critical Analysis
date
newest »
newest »
"First, the legend is not “Native American,” it is thought to have originated as a belief of the Navajo tribe, one of many many many different tribes in existence in North America in that century."Wait, what? Is Lough saying the Navajo aren't Native American? Or is he just saying that beliefs in North America never spread from tribe to tribe?
I think he was saying it is not a legend common to Native American tribes as a whole, it is specifically Navajo, but she just lumped all Native Americans together. Which may come across as badly as calling, for instance, someone from New Jersey a New Yorker.
Joe wrote: "I think he was saying it is not a legend common to Native American tribes as a whole, it is specifically Navajo, but she just lumped all Native Americans together. Which may come across as badly as..."Someone from New Jersey is still an American, though, no? The Navajo are Native American. I get that she could or even should have written Navajo, but it's hard to see her sentence as disrespectful:
"The legend of the Native American ‘skin walker’"
Even in his criticism, Lough is rearranging her word order to suit his ends, when he reads it as "(Native American) Legend", rather than a "Legend of [the] (Native American) Skin-Walker". Someone needs to work on his phrase structure trees again, because Rowling is clearly using Native American to describe the ethnicity of a being, not to describe the origins of the legend.
A lot about this situation irritates me for reasons I don't want to get into but I'll just say that the 4 pieces Rowling released were subpar to say the least. They were poorly researched and written and it feels like Rowling didn't put much time into it. It's disappointing as Rowling fan but what can you do?
Darren wrote: "Someone from New Jersey is still an American, though, no?"If you called them an American, then your comparison would stand. Calling them a New Yorker would result in a gruff correction, at the least.
I thought Lough qualified his correction well by pointing out that Rowling doesn't lump all European legends/schools/whatever into one group, but instead differentiates them based on their local ethnicity/nationality. Whereas with the Native American legends, again, she lumped them all together. You can argue he's splitting hairs, and you'd be correct to an extent, but he does have a point, however meager.
Darren wrote: "Joe wrote: "I think he was saying it is not a legend common to Native American tribes as a whole, it is specifically Navajo, but she just lumped all Native Americans together. Which may come across..."It's akin too stepping up too a Swede and saying: "You're from Europe right? What's up with those Greek legends and all the incest?" Only, y'know, worse. Since contemporary Europe isn't currently still having to deal with people pretending you don't exist. It just demonstrates how deeply ignorant you are.
Darren wrote: "Someone from New Jersey is still an American, though, no? The Navajo are Native American. I get that she could or even should have written Navajo, but it's hard to see her sentence as disrespectful:"Oh no, nothing offensive at all, no more than saying that Asians worship Shiva, or that Europeans are pale skinned redheads who love Guinness beer and potatoes.
And don't get me started on the promotional video for this that shows witches getting burned at the stake. That never happened in the Thirteen Colonies. Slaves got burned for rebellion; witches were merely hanged.
Well, there was that one fellow at Salem who was crushed by rocks. As a New Yorker, I don't know about New Jersey folks being Americans... What exit are we talking about?
Sean wrote: "Oh no, nothing offensive at all, no more than saying that Asians worship Shiva, or that Europeans are pale skinned redheads who love Guinness beer and potatoes. "Or that Seans don't read posts, I guess.
The Tor article and the Jemisin quotes in it are both a bit out of touch in my opinion.
Did anyone actually read the Pottermore stuff in question? These are sketches not even short stories. That alone would be enough to excuse the generalizations. But in those sketches I think she shows more awareness of native american traditions than she does any sort of European folklore. Let's face it, the Potter books are a hodgepodge of common fantasy tropes. They are not deep reflections on European mythology so why should that be any different when she switches locale?
Did anyone actually read the Pottermore stuff in question? These are sketches not even short stories. That alone would be enough to excuse the generalizations. But in those sketches I think she shows more awareness of native american traditions than she does any sort of European folklore. Let's face it, the Potter books are a hodgepodge of common fantasy tropes. They are not deep reflections on European mythology so why should that be any different when she switches locale?
Matthew wrote: "...the Potter books are a hodgepodge of common fantasy tropes. They are not deep reflections on European mythology so why should that be any different when she switches locale?.."that is a good observation. perhaps when looking for a block buster, a publisher might weight the broad appeal of a book quite heavily.
"in the best light, pottermore, the publisher, has exercised the lazy and exploitative aspects of business opportunism. "In my opinion, this sentence describes the entire arc of Rowling's career. I wish she would just go away already. She has contributed next to nothing to literature and is only creditable with being famous, popular, and influential. But not insightful or intellectual. She's the flavor of the week and I wish Sunday would come around sooner.
Kenneth wrote: ""in the best light, pottermore, the publisher, has exercised the lazy and exploitative aspects of business opportunism. "In my opinion, this sentence describes the entire arc of Rowling's career. I wish she would just go away already. She has contributed next to nothing to literature and is only creditable with being famous, popular, and influential. But not insightful or intellectual. She's the flavor of the week and I wish Sunday would come around sooner. "
I don't think you can call two decades in which she's consistently been "famous, popular, and influential" the "flavor of the week". Not if you want to complain about being insightful, anyway.
Sure I can. James Patterson has been pumping out books for decades too. Doesn't mean any of them have any literary merit. The difference is that this time, Rowling has crossed a line so far that even the people who couldn't see it before have cried foul at her choices.
Kenneth wrote: "Sure I can. James Patterson has been pumping out books for decades too. Doesn't mean any of them have any literary merit. The difference is that this time, Rowling has crossed a line so far that ..."
Nice try to change the wording. James Patterson? He farms out his name to other writers. But, with decades of popularity to the name, you also couldn't call him a flavor of the week. I mean you could. You could call an orange a banana if you wanted, but you'd be wrong. Now, is Rowling a good writer?
The Harry Potter books are children's/young adult novels. I find it pretty bizarre that you're talking about her like she was shooting for The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages.
after reading this BBC interview w/Rowling, i'm not surprised at her attitude towards the appropriation of another culture for her own purposes.http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0076w0r
go to 8:25.
on the other hand, she does acknowledge the importance of research.
Darren, it's not me. It's her fans and (seemingly, from her published interviews) she herself who consider her some kind of authority of the written word in the modern era. Very distateful.
I could tell Harry Potter was a conglomeration of English fantasy tropes from the getgo. Rowling farmed mythology at length and did it well. Yes, they're kids-to-YA books. They are good for what they are.My main annoyance with Rowling is that she took heavily from F/SF tropes even down to appropriating "mundanes" as "muggles," then said she didn't consider Harry Potter a work of fantasy. What else is a magic school supposed to be?!?
Sounds like Rowling pissed in Kenneth's Wheaties. Bad Jo! Bad!
http://www.tor.com/2016/03/10/j-k-row...
in the best light, pottermore, the publisher, has exercised the lazy and exploitative aspects of business opportunism.