Bright, I guess I missed this particular post. Just want to say that I also do not think the books are about the inherent fascism of the Democrats in America. I definitely don't think that JKR was making any specific allusions to any particular President, Prime Minister or any other leader. Any comment I made on that account was to show that you can read certain portions of a book (or see parts of a movie like Star Wars) from any angle you like . . .and also to complain that reviewers should stop trying to throw in jabs and just review a movie or a book. It's just my pet peeve.

"So does Rowling's overall failure to inject a feminist critique into Harry Potter reflect her desire to prevent the boys from having to engage in some serious self-critique, a caving in to popular dislike of feminism, or her own discomfort with feminism?"

Oh for heaven's sake. Maybe, just maybe, as someone has pointed out, it's because feminism does not have to play a central role in every piece of writing created. In fact, I probably would not have enjoyed the books half as much had there been an overtly feminist message - I find the idea of a preachy Hermione, or a falsely masculinized Mrs Weasley off-putting. I am not reactionary (I am a female graduate student) - I am not condoning a return to the days of no vote and Betty Crocker, but the thing that I think many feminists refuse to acknowledge is that many women are happy to fill what some call 'traditional roles'. The characters in this book are real, and range from women with great influence and power in their careers (Prof McGonagle, Amelia Bones) to women with great influence and power at home (Mrs Weasley), neither of which is more admirable than the other. The suggestion later in the Fray that Ginny became a 'Quidditch mum' is, I think, unfounded - I think it is equally likely that both she and Hermione enjoyed success in both their careers and their family lives.

...Elizabeth Moon? She's an excellent writer.

kmhl,

I totally agree with you 100%. Especially about how the characters in the book were REAL and covered broad ranges, just like people do in real life.

I found it actually funny that after the book came out, but before JKR revealed what the trio was doing at the time of the epilogue, many people (mostly women and girls) were horrified to think that Hermione and Ginny were "just moms". No one ever noticed that NO ONE's career was discussed, not even Ron and Harry's! It was automatically assumed that they stayed at home and they were furious about it!

Then, when the news came out that Hermione was "high up in the Dept. of Magical Law Enforcement" and Ginny had played for the Harpies and then quit to "start a family" and was now a sportswriter for the Daily Prophet, the same people were still upset. "High up"? Why isn't she the Head of it if Harry is the Head of the Auror Dept.? Ginny's basically a work from home mom which I guess equates with a stay at home mom.

Nothing was ever good enough! It drove me nuts! Still does.

It's nice to see someone else that just reads a book to enjoy it and doesn't have to give a "critical" analysis of it.