Mary, you're right - it really does come down to agreeing to differ on these issues. I'm already stepping away from this conversation, because it will utterly consume my time (which I don't have at the moment); because, like I said, I really can't make my case properly without the entirety of Part III of my book (and more, really); and because, as I've said, I think there are two different and plausible ways of reading these issues. I'm probably in the minority position on this, based on the other literature out there. But, still, I'm not the only one who think she's done a really good job of putting these issues on the table for readers. Sarah Zettel, for example, a "bona fide feminist," does not agree that the series is sexist.
And really, the key point of it all - the Fabian methodology, Libertarian freedom, and Christian social vision represent the three most important keys to Rowling's social vision, without which I think it's hard to get an overarching handle on what she's trying to do. I think I've found something of a "hidden key" (to borrow my friend, John Granger's term) in this three-pronged connection, but like I said before - I can't lay it all out here. Publisher and all.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-07-01 08:34 pm (UTC)And really, the key point of it all - the Fabian methodology, Libertarian freedom, and Christian social vision represent the three most important keys to Rowling's social vision, without which I think it's hard to get an overarching handle on what she's trying to do. I think I've found something of a "hidden key" (to borrow my friend, John Granger's term) in this three-pronged connection, but like I said before - I can't lay it all out here. Publisher and all.