Only if 27-year-old Luke was being a silly boy when he broke up with someone by 20-page essay with ev-psych primer. (BTW, did you intend the reference?) Stupid, but not childish.
I said to Luke when I read that, “You know, Luke, it hasn’t happened yet in the story, but I’d already planned out, before I read your post, that when I want to have Harry screw up a conversation with Hermione as badly as possible, I’m going to have him start talking about evolutionary psychology. You literally did that in the way I’d imagined as the worst way possible.” (Though the actual chapter didn’t come out quite that way when I wrote it—there isn’t anything about evolutionary psychology until the very end.)
So I thought of this as a stereotypically male-stupid thing to do, and independently Luke, who happens to be male, went and did it. Can you name a woman who’s done the same?
I didn’t read Harry’s statements as stereotypically male-child-stupid or even stereotypically male-stupid, but stereotypically hyperintellectualist-male-stupid—as in specifically similar to behavior like Luke’s, not that of any non-Internet non-rationalist man I’ve actually met. A male child of ordinary intellectual background, no matter how stupid, could not have made the specific mistakes Harry made here, because he drew his deemed-inappropriate ideas from “enlightened” papers.
A good example of stereotypically male-child-stupid is Ron’s lines you quote here (and many of Ron’s actions in general). These are stupid comments Ron was able to make in spite of not having read any papers.
Hermione’s reactions are stereotypically female-child-stupid. She reacted the way she did precisely because of not reading these particular enlightened papers. This is the exact opposite of Harry’s stupidity! I think I understand why you wrote the scene with these results—Harry has read lots of rationalist papers you think more people should read, while Hermione in spite of her intelligence does not have the exact same background. However, because Hermione’s actions fit with “stupid female child”—not alleviated by her intelligence—and Harry’s with “stupid-though-very-intelligent male adult” (Harry’s reading on these specific psychological ideas is very incongruent with that of even most well-educated 11-year-old boys), we get subtext like Alicorn points out about female infantilism and so on.
As for some anecdata, last month when I was explaining to a progressing-to-ex-boyfriend that he did not meet my paramour standards, he said I should consider lowering my standards, and I said he was proof that strategy could not possibly work for me.
...do note that Hermione at one point reacts in a genre-savvy fashion by saying that it’s fine for Harry to have a dark side.
Please keep in mind that a lot of this apparent problem is generated by the unalterable fact that Harry, who has Stuff Going On and has been through hell as the title character and has to grow fast enough to be competitive with people like Dumbledore and Professor Quirrell (all genders chosen by Rowling) happens to be male, whereas Hermione, who like many other characters is going to have difficulty competing with Harry at this point in the story, happens to be female. I mean, suppose Rowling had made her professionally paranoid Auror a woman. It’s not unthinkable that someone might complain about how Harry, a male, managed to land a stun on Madam Moody. Symmetrically, if Draco had discovered Harry doing science with Hermione some chapters earlier, he wouldn’t have had the same reaction but he would’ve had an equally difficult reaction for Harry to deal with, and yes I would’ve figured out some way to make the adultery joke there too.
The main lesson I’m learning is that there are potential Problems when you arrange the plot so that you have the main character interacting with two different tiers of powered characters (Harry-Draco-Hermione and Harry-Dumbledore-Quirrell) and you haven’t arranged the plot to have the main character’s companions go through everything the main character does… but that problem is far too late to correct now.
P.S: In retrospect there’s exactly one important canon character in this story whose gender I could freely choose, and I did happen to make her female, but that’s not going to be apparent until later.
P.S: In retrospect there’s exactly one important canon character in this story whose gender I could freely choose, and I did happen to make her female, but that’s not going to be apparent until later.
Clearly, this line is the only important part of this comment. Let the games begin!
(Tonks would be the obvious guess, since there’s long been speculation about gender-bending metamorphamagi. But she’s presented as female in canon, and Eliezer would probably object to the notion that the mere ability to change body shape would count as changing sex.)
Hmm, he didn’t say “she’s not going to appear until later”, he said “that’s not going to be apparent until later”. This suggests that the character has already appeared, doesn’t it?
(I might have guessed that the androgynous Voldemort could have been a female character in this fic, but I believe Eliezer has already flat-out stated that he’s sticking to Quirrell = Voldemort.)
Hmm, he didn’t say “she’s not going to appear until later”, he said “that’s not going to be apparent until later”. This suggests that the character has already appeared, doesn’t it?
I’m going with Penelope Clearwater. The competent, sober, older-Ravenclaw-prefect role could have been just about anyone (thus fulfilling the “important character who’s gender I could choose” requirement), but Penelope was chosen (thus the “make her female” requirement). She hasn’t done anything outstanding yet, thus the “apparent until later”.
I’ve had strong suspicions for a while that both Penelope and Goyle will have awesome roles to play in the future.
Eliezer would probably object to the notion that the mere ability to change body shape would count as changing sex
I have no idea what Eliezer would think on the subject.
My feeling is that if a metamorphamagus is changing the body, then this means changing the hormones—they’re a member of the sex they appear to be in every way with the possible exception of childhood memories. (I don’t remember at what age the ability to metamorphize kicks in.)
I could argue that that they’re “really” a gender we don’t have a word for.
My feeling is that if a metamorphamagus is changing the body, then this means changing the hormones—they’re a member of the sex they appear to be in every way with the possible exception of childhood memories. (I don’t remember at what age the ability to metamorphize kicks in.)
Well, that depends on how said hormones are affecting brain development during childhood and in the womb—and I don’t recall hearing tales of transsexuals taking such hormones having, say, their sexual orientation affected. (I haven’t researched this.)
On the other hand, there’s mention in canon of a baby changing their hair color, which would indicate that it doesn’t “kick in” at a specific point in time. I’m not sure what this means for the gender-changing-Tonks hypothesis; is there any research into children with irregular levels of sex hormones, or who started taking hormones in childhood?
I could argue that that they’re “really” a gender we don’t have a word for.
Androgynous? Hermaphrodite? Genderqueer? Those are words, and while their meanings are … fluid … they could all probably be applied to such an individual.
Ultimately, we can never be entirely certain one way or the other without Word of God; magic can cover a multitude of sins. Unless his opinions have changed since he wrote that article, however, I’m guessing the most she could achieve would be an inferior “penis-shaped vagina”, perhaps with looks based on a specific individual for realism. If her powers actually bother dealing with hormone levels and such, it’s presumably dealt with automatically, so it could simply refuse to mess with sex hormones beyond certain limits. She carried a baby to term in canon, and there was certainly no mention of having to avoid certain transformations. Not that there would be, necessarily.
Hat & Cloak turning out to be McGonagall would be the most mind-bending and awesome plot twist ever. Unfortunately Hat & Cloak isn’t a canon character (right? I didn’t read the books), so this wouldn’t fit EY’s hint.
I didn’t read Harry’s statements as stereotypically male-child-stupid or even stereotypically male-stupid, but stereotypically hyperintellectualist-male-stupid—as in specifically similar to behavior like Luke’s, not that of any non-Internet non-rationalist man I’ve actually met.
If I had to imagine a male doing that with a straight face in Real Life, it would likely be a right-wing dick talking through his ass who likes evolutionary psychology because it supports his position rather than because he actually has a good understanding of it (Exhibit A). OTOH, I can imagine hyperintellectualist males doing that tongue-in-cheek, and occasionally the joke would fall flat unless his interlocutor was hyperintellectualist herself.
Most students in HPMOR are silly when not under pressure (witch counterexample: Penelope Clearwater). They’re also named after fan artists with upcoming cameos. Who tend to be female.
And yes, there’s a Gossipy Hens trope in HPMOR, the converse of which is the horrible dating advice dispensed by males with their parody PUA community, both of whom are there because someone has to horribly misinterpret the situation, and which are gender-correlated because… well, because that part is realistic and there are things in HPMOR that happen because that’s what the prior causal forces output, not necessarily because that’s how I freely decided the outcome should be.
This is making me realize that these discussions tend to not have a sense of scale. I’m not crazy about the undifferentiated gossiping mass (and it’s reached the point where I’m not having as much fun with it—it was funny the first time or three), but I don’t think it’s a huge flaw. It’s entertaining to see the gossip get more rationalist, but not in a way that seems to help it be more accurate.
I hadn’t noticed there was a parody PUA community, it just seemed as though there was occasional bits of PUA stuff showing up now and then. Definitely time to reread.
By the standards of our community, yes, you’re never supposed to flee in tears, and Harry has right-of-way to express any ideas he wants. Hermione has not been raised with this ideal, and Harry has not yet pressed it on her.
And canon!Hermione in her fifth-year, who delivered Umbridge unto the centaurs, wouldn’t have fled in tears; and Harry could have told her about Draco much earlier, confident that 5th-year!Hermione could put on a mask around Draco and keep it up.
This is first-year!canon!Hermione:
Ron was in a very bad temper by the end of the class.
“It’s no wonder no one can stand her,” he said to Harry as they pushed their way into the crowded corridor. “She’s a nightmare, honestly.”
Someone knocked into Harry as they hurried past him. It was Hermione. Harry caught a glimpse of her face—and was startled to see that she was in tears.
“I think she heard you.”
“So?” said Ron, but he looked a bit uncomfortable. “She must’ve noticed she’s got no friends.”
Hermione didn’t turn up for the next class and wasn’t seen all afternoon. On their way down to the Great Hall for the Hallowe’en feast, Harry and Ron overheard Parvati Patil telling her friend Lavender that Hermione was crying in the girls’ toilets and wanted to be left alone. Ron looked still more awkward at this, but a moment later they had entered the Great Hall, where the Hallowe’en decorations put Hermione out of their minds.
Yes, and? The canon scene is Hermione “crying and wanting to be left alone”. That is not particularly silly—it’s emotional, but not even all that childish; depressed or particularly put-upon adults cry and want to be left alone. You, by contrast, have Hermione hysterically, italicizedly telling Harry that he cannot do science with two people at once, and doubling down on it even after she has a chance to realize that this is preposterous.
Erm… a basic law of MoR is that people gain maturity/competence in proportion to how much hell they’ve been through. This creates a power balance problem where Harry, as main character, has been to Azkaban and Hermione hasn’t, and fighting bullies isn’t quite enough to make up for that. However, I would indeed maintain as a literary matter that this Hermione has been through more hell than the quoted canon!Hermione and is visibly more powerful and competent. Methods!Hermione doesn’t flee in tears if Ron calls her a nightmare, though she would’ve at the start of the year. She probably wouldn’t even notice.
Erm… a basic law of MoR is that people gain maturity/competence in proportion to how much hell they’ve been through.
For an otherwise rational fanfic this seems oddly like a rule out of Dungeons and Dragons.
Edit:Also, it seems like at this point Hermione has gone through some pretty awful stuff also so by this logic her competence level should have gone up a lot.
“Whatever does not kill you makes you stronger” is D+D-esque now? Experience makes people better, as a rule, as long as you can avoid being broken by it.
Also, Hermione’s competence level has gone up a lot. You don’t think she’s a lot stronger than she was at the beginning of the story?
Yeah, that makes this if anything sound even more like D&D. Where is the motivation for this rule coming from? Is there any evidence humans actually act this way at all? The only related evidence I’m aware of goes in the other direction: Traumatized children are more likely to have behaviorial problems and lower IQ after the fact. Citation. (Thought that just popped into my head, could reduced levels of corporal punishment and generally more stable lives be a contributing factor to the Flynn effect?).
There’s a Dilbert cartoon in which Dilbert thinks he’s really just been faking it since sixth grade.
At age 17 I went through a bit of hell bad enough that I don’t particularly want to talk about it, and three weeks later woke up one morning and realized that I would never feel like that Dilbert cartoon again. Literally, just woke up in the morning. It wasn’t the result of any epiphany, it seemed more like something biological my brain just did in response. My main reaction was, “Why couldn’t my brain have done this three weeks earlier when it would’ve #$&%ing helped?”
Not sure how that squares with the research, and I couldn’t point to anywhere in my life where it happened except that one point.
However, the actual literary logic is something more like, “Once you show Harry thinking his way out of Azkaban, it is no longer possible for him to lose an even battle to Draco—the reader won’t believe it.” I don’t think the ‘power up through trial’ thing is actually unrealistic, I mean, if I come out of this planet alive I’m probably not going to be fazed by much after that. But it’s the more fundamental literary reason why so many stories work that way. You will perceive that this also points in the direction of, “Being run over by a truck isn’t the same as punching the truck to a standstill” in terms of whether you powered up after that.
Even so, imagine Methods!Granger fleeing to the bathroom after just hearing Ron call her a nightmare. That could’ve happened in Ch. 9, maybe, but now Granger has fought three older bullies successfully and you’d be, like, “Yeah right.” But she hasn’t been to Azkaban, either.
Even so, imagine Methods!Granger fleeing to the bathroom after just hearing Ron call her a nightmare. That could’ve happened in Ch. 9, maybe, but by this point Granger has been fighting older bullies successfully and you’d be, like, “Yeah right.”
Wait wait wait. Just hearing Ron call her a nightmare? That’s not at all why Hermione is crying! Hermione is crying because:
She’s a muggleborn.
She has no friends.
Everyone knows she has no friends.
No one has decided to befriend her, even though they know that she doesn’t have friends.
Hermione realizes that her best isn’t good enough. It doesn’t matter that she’s good at magic; she’s a muggleborn. It doesn’t matter that she’s helpful; other people don’t like her despite her good intentions. It doesn’t matter that she’s hurting; other people don’t care. And so a homesick little girl hides her frustration and pain in the bathroom.
In Methods, the same comment will have a different effect because the reality on the ground is different.
Beyond that, how one responds to social and combat situations is often different; one can easily develop strength in one without strength in the other.
I mean, if I come out of this planet alive I’m probably not going to be fazed by much after that
My opinion of you has ebbed and flowed a lot, Eliezer, but one thing for which I doubt I will ever stop loving you is the way you can talk like a science fiction character with the most perfect nonchalance.
You keep starting comments with “Erm...” and then talking past me; I’m really not sure what to make of it. You don’t actually have to respond to criticism of your fic if you don’t want to...
One of my subagents thinks for some reason that it would be helpful for me to present, instead of direct criticism, a discussion of my own writing weaknesses and what I do / want to do about them, thereby lightly grazing some fraction of what I would say directly about your writing. The subagent thinks that this will be less likely to make you defensive. Is it off-base?
Very possibly on-base. I think my brain is worried that other people will read this and say, “Ah, Eliezer is a patriarchalist writer” instead of, “Oh, well, invisibly behind the scenes Eliezer was trying to juggle this and a dozen other writing problems and desiderata simultaneously and this is what we got.” Talking about your own analogous writing problems seems much more likely to lead the wider audience to the second conclusion.
I had no particular intention to talk past you; as we both know, conveying meaning using words is hard, and I might not’ve understood your intended main point.
I’m more comfortable with female characters myself. Both Luminosity and Radiance have girl protags; the Elcenia books are a mix, and of the finished ones there’s two female protagonists, a male one whose girlfriend spends a lot of time in the spotlight, and an ensemble cast that only mostly belongs to the male character I think of as its center. I could make up reasons why that isn’t something I did on purpose. Luminosity and Radiance are fanfiction. I didn’t invent Rhysel, Julie did; Julie also invented Talyn, and his story spends more time focusing on his romance than Rhysel’s did; Ilen’s not a strong enough character to hold up his own entire book until the very end of the plot; Ehail hardly counts because she’s so wispy and much of her book is a vehicle for plot that just happens conveniently nearby her...
But that’s a cop-out. I could have written Luminosity with a rationalist Edward if that had struck my fancy, if I’d been willing to lean a little farther away from the canon conceit. I could have given Bella a son instead of a clone of Renesmee with a less silly name, that was completely open to me to have her make that choice when she had the choice. If Ilen’s too weak to carry a book without help from his sisters and his mother and his niece and his girlfriend (and his brother and his dad, some), why does Ehail hold up hers so much better, when she’s at least as wobbly a personality? (Is it because she has a more supportive love interest? Not entirely.) When I rebooted Elcenia, it was open to me start anywhere. I didn’t need to start with Rhysel, or start with Rhysel’s summoning—I could have written a book about Narax or Revenn or someone first. Heck, writing a book about Narax’s backstory might have been a stronger opening, and I only just now thought of it. Talyn has a lot of complex motivations besides his girlfriend’s existence. Does she really need that many perspective chapters? Does he really need to do so many things because of her? Probably not; and this might make his book weaker or stronger that he does, but the reason I did it that way wasn’t because I made an artistic choice, it was because it felt natural to spend about a third of Talyn’s book in Leekath’s head.
(I’ll try to stick more to Luminosity examples; I don’t know how much Elcenia you’ve read.)
I think I’m reasonably good at keeping tertiary characters of both genders on an even footing. In Luminosity, Mike Newton and Jessica Stanley are equivalents; Sulpicia and Afton are equally irrelevant mates-of-villains-who-matter.
When I promote them to greater importance, my male characters start to fall apart.
Bella finesses Edward’s motivations almost immediately and is too much of a force for him to exert any meaningful pressure however much she loves him, and by the end of Radiance he’s her glorified radio. Jacob is not smart enough or special enough to keep up with Elspeth except in the literal sense of accompanying her throughout some of the story, and he doesn’t even get a chance to win her affection on his own, he coasts on Chelsea’s “help”. Where canon makes Jacob a force to be reckoned with at least as wolves go, I passed him over completely in the first book until the very end, in favor of his sisters who get literally no appearances in the original quartet. My hand wasn’t forced there. I could have made Jacob the alpha and left Rachel and Becky in college and Hawaii where Meyer put them.
Alice is cleverer and more charming than Jasper, Esme is less of a caricature of naive goodness than Carlisle, Emmett’s motivations are shallower than Rosalie’s. Aro is powerful and dangerous, but rather than bother with giving him a competence upgrade to challenge my girls, I threw in an original (female!) witch-vampire wildcard. When I needed a random non-witch Volturi, I picked a name with no attached character out of the back of Breaking Dawn, didn’t know it was a man’s name, and invented a half-sympathetic female dancer instead and had to retcon why she would be called “Santiago”. Maggie the lie detector is important and adorable with a strong voice and a personality. Charles the truth detector—who has comparable presence in canon—is a throwaway vaguely creepy flashback line in the mnemic blast. Liam’s subordinate to Siobhan and Tia’s subordinate to Benjamin—guess which couple gets to do anything meaningful? Heidi and Corin both have combat-relevant powers—guess who’s still relevant at the Volturi’s last stand?
I try to compensate for this. I don’t work that hard, because I have lots of other things to focus on, and I know I’m one author in a literary environment that is pretty thoroughly dominated by other people’s male protagonists, but I do try. The two Elcenia novels I’m currently in the middle of have one male and one female protagonist, and the former’s story is longer—but come to think of it, Mallyn is very thoroughly shaped by the females in his life. He’s closer to his mother than his father; his sisters than his brothers; his girlfriends, crushes and platonic female friends than his male friends. I could disclaim responsibility here too—Mallyn’s not originally mine either, he’s Julie’s, she could have changed that if she’d decided he was gay or more comfortable with his dad or more interested in befriending Kaylo than Korulen, but I’m writing this now. If I want to rebalance this, I need to downplay Sashpark, play up Aaseth, downplay Rithka and play up Nemaar, downplay Finnah and play up Eran, postpone Kimmet’s introduction for as long as I reasonably can and try to build up Mallyn’s relationship with Gyre. I have the tools. But the male characters on that list don’t interest me as much; I don’t want to spend as much time talking to them through Mallyn’s lips.
(It will not surprise anyone, I imagine, that Elcenia has so many characters that I once named 200 of them from memory.)
I can write a variety of male personalities. Talyn and Jacob and—oh, let’s throw in a Goldmage character, Wiar—are all very different from each other and all unambiguous dudes. And all those personalities fracture a little under stress, when I try to zoom in on them. I can make this work for me. Talyn’s unstable, he goes off and does wild and arrogant things and he doesn’t have to act within a very narrow band of character traits for my betas to laugh and go “Talyn is being so Talyn!” Jacob’s an intellectual half-step behind everyone around him because he doesn’t have a vampire brain or massive intellectual gifts; when I don’t know what to do with him, I can have him struggle to catch up. Wiar’s gradually losing his memory and I only have to sustain him for a few more chapters before it would be inconsistent for him to have more than fragments of a personality left at all. And despite the fact that I can cover for myself like that, I wish I knew how to write male characters who were solid all the way through. Who react instead of going fuzzy in my head when things happen to them. Whose perspectives remain plain and whose motives remain followable at times when I’m now tempted to dip into their girlfriends’ perspectives instead. Who have voices, who will talk fluently through me—instead of being lists of traits that I compare mechanically against pressures and histories to see what permissible results get spat out.
[Is this helpful?]
Edit: It just occurred to me that I might be able to remove one of my crutches when I get around to writing some of the gay male protagonists I have waiting in the wings. There’s an Elcenia lead couple of boys I’ll get to once I’m deeper into the politics arc. But then, one of them has a dominant twin sister… you see how hard this is?
I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere as a way of finding out what background assumptions one has about gender.
Unfortunately, I have no obvious way of tracking down the cite, but I think the author found that when the male characters were given female pronouns, the amount of agency they showed became very unattractive. I don’t remember what the shift was when the male characters were given female pronouns.
On my first reading of Mieville’s Embassytown, I kept getting thrown out of the story because I couldn’t believe the protagonist was female. I think it’s because she was more interested in travel than in people. On the second reading, it wasn’t a problem.
A prominent pop-culture example is the Mass Effect sci-fi game series. Unless Commander Shepard’s gender is directly relevant (such as during romantic subplots), he/she will say the exact same lines whether man or woman.
Over five years and three lengthy and ambitious games, I’ve probably read hundreds of pages of people discussing every aspect of the series and its narrative. The single time I can remember anyone saying that ‘FemShep’ felt a bit off was in direct response to the above observation; outside of that, she was wildly popular and often named as a positive model for the writing of female protagonists.
Tangent: This basically does that. It doesn’t work perfectly on hpmor, though—it swaps the pronouns just fine, but only some of the names, so you have to not only remember that Harry is now Harriet but also do that without being thrown off by the fact that Hermione is still Hermione but with male pronouns. That’s patchable (eg, eg), but I don’t know that it’d be worth the trouble.
Grownup sexual issues in the sense of acquainting one’s genitalia with someone else’s body parts are (mostly) theoretical for (not too precocious) children! Issues of one’s sex are decidedly NOT. From a very, very young age—maybe for boys it doesn’t become non-theoretical until middle school, but I’d laugh at the idea that girls aren’t hyperconscious of gender expectations after the age of about five. MOR!Hermione is constantly comparing her relationship with Harry to “Romances” she has read, expecting herself to fill such a role under constant societal encouragement and reinforcement of how girls just act that way and melt in a variety of creative manners whenever they so much as think momentarily of love. That’s something she never ever would have been exposed to and acting upon if she hadn’t needed to visit McGonagall in December.
maybe for boys it doesn’t become non-theoretical until middle school
For many boys, gender is non-theoretical some years earlier than that, thanks to: ① adults pointing them at “boys’ toys” (trucks, guns, rockets, army men, footballs) and away from “girls’ toys” (dolls, ponies, kitchenware, jump ropes), and ② other kids, notably older kids, teasing boys as “sissies” or “girls” (!) if they stray too much outside of gender roles.
This post has been very educational to me. The people in my head are either direct copies of me or opaque blocks of remembered behavior by others. I’m not even confident I can tell the difference if someone else is writing them. The fact that it works like this for you is humbling. I wonder how much of that is talent, and how much is skill...
Inverse Utility Monster: deliberately goes through hell, returns superpowered.
Specifically:
Sign up for the Auror preparation program in your sixth year. It’s the next best thing. Oh, and if a famous Auror offers to oversee your summer internship, just ignore anyone who warns you that he’s a terrible influence or that you’re almost certainly going to die.
a basic law of MoR is that people gain maturity/competence in proportion to how much hell they’ve been through.
Why?
EDIT:
However, the actual literary logic is something more like, “Once you show Harry thinking his way out of Azkaban, it is no longer possible for him to lose an even battle to Draco—the reader won’t believe it.” I don’t think the ‘power up through trial’ thing is actually unrealistic, I mean, if I come out of this planet alive I’m probably not going to be fazed by much after that. But it’s the more fundamental literary reason why so many stories work that way. You will perceive that this also points in the direction of, “Being run over by a truck isn’t the same as punching the truck to a standstill” in terms of whether you powered up after that.
By the standards of our community, yes, you’re never supposed to flee in tears, and Harry has right-of-way to express any ideas he wants.
In a public debate, yes, that is bad form.
But getting emotional, crying and running off does not necessarily merit penalty points in a human interaction, and certainly not for 12 year old girls who have recently been threatened with a lengthy term of prison/torture, and finds that her best friend and savior had a hidden and close relationship with someone who wanted to do horrible things to her. Violation of basic trust and in group solidarity.
Harry isn’t being a silly boy in Ch. 87?
Only if 27-year-old Luke was being a silly boy when he broke up with someone by 20-page essay with ev-psych primer. (BTW, did you intend the reference?) Stupid, but not childish.
I said to Luke when I read that, “You know, Luke, it hasn’t happened yet in the story, but I’d already planned out, before I read your post, that when I want to have Harry screw up a conversation with Hermione as badly as possible, I’m going to have him start talking about evolutionary psychology. You literally did that in the way I’d imagined as the worst way possible.” (Though the actual chapter didn’t come out quite that way when I wrote it—there isn’t anything about evolutionary psychology until the very end.)
So I thought of this as a stereotypically male-stupid thing to do, and independently Luke, who happens to be male, went and did it. Can you name a woman who’s done the same?
I didn’t read Harry’s statements as stereotypically male-child-stupid or even stereotypically male-stupid, but stereotypically hyperintellectualist-male-stupid—as in specifically similar to behavior like Luke’s, not that of any non-Internet non-rationalist man I’ve actually met. A male child of ordinary intellectual background, no matter how stupid, could not have made the specific mistakes Harry made here, because he drew his deemed-inappropriate ideas from “enlightened” papers.
A good example of stereotypically male-child-stupid is Ron’s lines you quote here (and many of Ron’s actions in general). These are stupid comments Ron was able to make in spite of not having read any papers.
Hermione’s reactions are stereotypically female-child-stupid. She reacted the way she did precisely because of not reading these particular enlightened papers. This is the exact opposite of Harry’s stupidity! I think I understand why you wrote the scene with these results—Harry has read lots of rationalist papers you think more people should read, while Hermione in spite of her intelligence does not have the exact same background. However, because Hermione’s actions fit with “stupid female child”—not alleviated by her intelligence—and Harry’s with “stupid-though-very-intelligent male adult” (Harry’s reading on these specific psychological ideas is very incongruent with that of even most well-educated 11-year-old boys), we get subtext like Alicorn points out about female infantilism and so on.
As for some anecdata, last month when I was explaining to a progressing-to-ex-boyfriend that he did not meet my paramour standards, he said I should consider lowering my standards, and I said he was proof that strategy could not possibly work for me.
...do note that Hermione at one point reacts in a genre-savvy fashion by saying that it’s fine for Harry to have a dark side.
Please keep in mind that a lot of this apparent problem is generated by the unalterable fact that Harry, who has Stuff Going On and has been through hell as the title character and has to grow fast enough to be competitive with people like Dumbledore and Professor Quirrell (all genders chosen by Rowling) happens to be male, whereas Hermione, who like many other characters is going to have difficulty competing with Harry at this point in the story, happens to be female. I mean, suppose Rowling had made her professionally paranoid Auror a woman. It’s not unthinkable that someone might complain about how Harry, a male, managed to land a stun on Madam Moody. Symmetrically, if Draco had discovered Harry doing science with Hermione some chapters earlier, he wouldn’t have had the same reaction but he would’ve had an equally difficult reaction for Harry to deal with, and yes I would’ve figured out some way to make the adultery joke there too.
The main lesson I’m learning is that there are potential Problems when you arrange the plot so that you have the main character interacting with two different tiers of powered characters (Harry-Draco-Hermione and Harry-Dumbledore-Quirrell) and you haven’t arranged the plot to have the main character’s companions go through everything the main character does… but that problem is far too late to correct now.
P.S: In retrospect there’s exactly one important canon character in this story whose gender I could freely choose, and I did happen to make her female, but that’s not going to be apparent until later.
Clearly, this line is the only important part of this comment. Let the games begin!
(Tonks would be the obvious guess, since there’s long been speculation about gender-bending metamorphamagi. But she’s presented as female in canon, and Eliezer would probably object to the notion that the mere ability to change body shape would count as changing sex.)
Hmm, he didn’t say “she’s not going to appear until later”, he said “that’s not going to be apparent until later”. This suggests that the character has already appeared, doesn’t it?
(I might have guessed that the androgynous Voldemort could have been a female character in this fic, but I believe Eliezer has already flat-out stated that he’s sticking to Quirrell = Voldemort.)
Ooh, well caught.
Hmm, Tonks has already appeared...
I’m going with Penelope Clearwater. The competent, sober, older-Ravenclaw-prefect role could have been just about anyone (thus fulfilling the “important character who’s gender I could choose” requirement), but Penelope was chosen (thus the “make her female” requirement). She hasn’t done anything outstanding yet, thus the “apparent until later”.
I’ve had strong suspicions for a while that both Penelope and Goyle will have awesome roles to play in the future.
Isn’t Penelope the only older Ravenclaw we’re shown in canon?
Is that why you chose her specifically to be voiced by Zoe Chace?
Hm… not consciously. I just felt like she’d be a good match, and wouldn’t take too much time.
I have no idea what Eliezer would think on the subject.
My feeling is that if a metamorphamagus is changing the body, then this means changing the hormones—they’re a member of the sex they appear to be in every way with the possible exception of childhood memories. (I don’t remember at what age the ability to metamorphize kicks in.)
I could argue that that they’re “really” a gender we don’t have a word for.
Allow me to enlighten you.
Well, that depends on how said hormones are affecting brain development during childhood and in the womb—and I don’t recall hearing tales of transsexuals taking such hormones having, say, their sexual orientation affected. (I haven’t researched this.)
On the other hand, there’s mention in canon of a baby changing their hair color, which would indicate that it doesn’t “kick in” at a specific point in time. I’m not sure what this means for the gender-changing-Tonks hypothesis; is there any research into children with irregular levels of sex hormones, or who started taking hormones in childhood?
Androgynous? Hermaphrodite? Genderqueer? Those are words, and while their meanings are … fluid … they could all probably be applied to such an individual.
Ultimately, we can never be entirely certain one way or the other without Word of God; magic can cover a multitude of sins. Unless his opinions have changed since he wrote that article, however, I’m guessing the most she could achieve would be an inferior “penis-shaped vagina”, perhaps with looks based on a specific individual for realism. If her powers actually bother dealing with hormone levels and such, it’s presumably dealt with automatically, so it could simply refuse to mess with sex hormones beyond certain limits. She carried a baby to term in canon, and there was certainly no mention of having to avoid certain transformations. Not that there would be, necessarily.
Ooh, a guessing game. I’ll go with… the Giant Squid.
No, it’s clearly Mrs. Barbara Dementor.
Fawkes
Mrs. Hat-and-Cloak
Hat & Cloak turning out to be McGonagall would be the most mind-bending and awesome plot twist ever. Unfortunately Hat & Cloak isn’t a canon character (right? I didn’t read the books), so this wouldn’t fit EY’s hint.
Fawkes is male in HPMOR.
e: unless the “that’s not going to be apparent until later” means that he will be revealed to have actually been female all along later on.
I would guess that phoenixes are hermaphroditic. Or maybe they’re spontaneously generated?
True conflict strengthens narrative. But then, you’re not really complaining about creating problems for your characters.
If I had to imagine a male doing that with a straight face in Real Life, it would likely be a right-wing dick talking through his ass who likes evolutionary psychology because it supports his position rather than because he actually has a good understanding of it (Exhibit A). OTOH, I can imagine hyperintellectualist males doing that tongue-in-cheek, and occasionally the joke would fall flat unless his interlocutor was hyperintellectualist herself.
Real or fictional? If the latter, Amy Farrah Fowler from The Big Bang Theory does similar stuff.
Harry was fumbling. He was not silly. He expressed reasonable propositions in clumsy ways. Hermione was silly throughout.
Maybe it matters that the girls in MOR are silly even when they aren’t under pressure.
Most students in HPMOR are silly when not under pressure (witch counterexample: Penelope Clearwater). They’re also named after fan artists with upcoming cameos. Who tend to be female.
And yes, there’s a Gossipy Hens trope in HPMOR, the converse of which is the horrible dating advice dispensed by males with their parody PUA community, both of whom are there because someone has to horribly misinterpret the situation, and which are gender-correlated because… well, because that part is realistic and there are things in HPMOR that happen because that’s what the prior causal forces output, not necessarily because that’s how I freely decided the outcome should be.
This is making me realize that these discussions tend to not have a sense of scale. I’m not crazy about the undifferentiated gossiping mass (and it’s reached the point where I’m not having as much fun with it—it was funny the first time or three), but I don’t think it’s a huge flaw. It’s entertaining to see the gossip get more rationalist, but not in a way that seems to help it be more accurate.
I hadn’t noticed there was a parody PUA community, it just seemed as though there was occasional bits of PUA stuff showing up now and then. Definitely time to reread.
By the standards of our community, yes, you’re never supposed to flee in tears, and Harry has right-of-way to express any ideas he wants. Hermione has not been raised with this ideal, and Harry has not yet pressed it on her.
And canon!Hermione in her fifth-year, who delivered Umbridge unto the centaurs, wouldn’t have fled in tears; and Harry could have told her about Draco much earlier, confident that 5th-year!Hermione could put on a mask around Draco and keep it up.
This is first-year!canon!Hermione:
Yes, and? The canon scene is Hermione “crying and wanting to be left alone”. That is not particularly silly—it’s emotional, but not even all that childish; depressed or particularly put-upon adults cry and want to be left alone. You, by contrast, have Hermione hysterically, italicizedly telling Harry that he cannot do science with two people at once, and doubling down on it even after she has a chance to realize that this is preposterous.
Erm… a basic law of MoR is that people gain maturity/competence in proportion to how much hell they’ve been through. This creates a power balance problem where Harry, as main character, has been to Azkaban and Hermione hasn’t, and fighting bullies isn’t quite enough to make up for that. However, I would indeed maintain as a literary matter that this Hermione has been through more hell than the quoted canon!Hermione and is visibly more powerful and competent. Methods!Hermione doesn’t flee in tears if Ron calls her a nightmare, though she would’ve at the start of the year. She probably wouldn’t even notice.
For an otherwise rational fanfic this seems oddly like a rule out of Dungeons and Dragons.
Edit:Also, it seems like at this point Hermione has gone through some pretty awful stuff also so by this logic her competence level should have gone up a lot.
“Whatever does not kill you makes you stronger” is D+D-esque now? Experience makes people better, as a rule, as long as you can avoid being broken by it.
Also, Hermione’s competence level has gone up a lot. You don’t think she’s a lot stronger than she was at the beginning of the story?
She didn’t get a chance to fight during that—it doesn’t work quite the same way.
Yeah, that makes this if anything sound even more like D&D. Where is the motivation for this rule coming from? Is there any evidence humans actually act this way at all? The only related evidence I’m aware of goes in the other direction: Traumatized children are more likely to have behaviorial problems and lower IQ after the fact. Citation. (Thought that just popped into my head, could reduced levels of corporal punishment and generally more stable lives be a contributing factor to the Flynn effect?).
It did work out that way in my own life.
There’s a Dilbert cartoon in which Dilbert thinks he’s really just been faking it since sixth grade.
At age 17 I went through a bit of hell bad enough that I don’t particularly want to talk about it, and three weeks later woke up one morning and realized that I would never feel like that Dilbert cartoon again. Literally, just woke up in the morning. It wasn’t the result of any epiphany, it seemed more like something biological my brain just did in response. My main reaction was, “Why couldn’t my brain have done this three weeks earlier when it would’ve #$&%ing helped?”
Not sure how that squares with the research, and I couldn’t point to anywhere in my life where it happened except that one point.
However, the actual literary logic is something more like, “Once you show Harry thinking his way out of Azkaban, it is no longer possible for him to lose an even battle to Draco—the reader won’t believe it.” I don’t think the ‘power up through trial’ thing is actually unrealistic, I mean, if I come out of this planet alive I’m probably not going to be fazed by much after that. But it’s the more fundamental literary reason why so many stories work that way. You will perceive that this also points in the direction of, “Being run over by a truck isn’t the same as punching the truck to a standstill” in terms of whether you powered up after that.
Even so, imagine Methods!Granger fleeing to the bathroom after just hearing Ron call her a nightmare. That could’ve happened in Ch. 9, maybe, but now Granger has fought three older bullies successfully and you’d be, like, “Yeah right.” But she hasn’t been to Azkaban, either.
Wait wait wait. Just hearing Ron call her a nightmare? That’s not at all why Hermione is crying! Hermione is crying because:
She’s a muggleborn.
She has no friends.
Everyone knows she has no friends.
No one has decided to befriend her, even though they know that she doesn’t have friends.
Hermione realizes that her best isn’t good enough. It doesn’t matter that she’s good at magic; she’s a muggleborn. It doesn’t matter that she’s helpful; other people don’t like her despite her good intentions. It doesn’t matter that she’s hurting; other people don’t care. And so a homesick little girl hides her frustration and pain in the bathroom.
In Methods, the same comment will have a different effect because the reality on the ground is different.
Beyond that, how one responds to social and combat situations is often different; one can easily develop strength in one without strength in the other.
My opinion of you has ebbed and flowed a lot, Eliezer, but one thing for which I doubt I will ever stop loving you is the way you can talk like a science fiction character with the most perfect nonchalance.
The “that made me stronger” feeling might not be all that correlated to actually becoming stronger.
Well, it makes you more confident, thus making you better at all tasks that have confidence as a limiting factor.
You keep starting comments with “Erm...” and then talking past me; I’m really not sure what to make of it. You don’t actually have to respond to criticism of your fic if you don’t want to...
I usually don’t respond, but I care unusually much about what the author of Luminosity thinks.
Hmm.
One of my subagents thinks for some reason that it would be helpful for me to present, instead of direct criticism, a discussion of my own writing weaknesses and what I do / want to do about them, thereby lightly grazing some fraction of what I would say directly about your writing. The subagent thinks that this will be less likely to make you defensive. Is it off-base?
Very possibly on-base. I think my brain is worried that other people will read this and say, “Ah, Eliezer is a patriarchalist writer” instead of, “Oh, well, invisibly behind the scenes Eliezer was trying to juggle this and a dozen other writing problems and desiderata simultaneously and this is what we got.” Talking about your own analogous writing problems seems much more likely to lead the wider audience to the second conclusion.
I had no particular intention to talk past you; as we both know, conveying meaning using words is hard, and I might not’ve understood your intended main point.
Okay, here’s my first pass at this.
I’m more comfortable with female characters myself. Both Luminosity and Radiance have girl protags; the Elcenia books are a mix, and of the finished ones there’s two female protagonists, a male one whose girlfriend spends a lot of time in the spotlight, and an ensemble cast that only mostly belongs to the male character I think of as its center. I could make up reasons why that isn’t something I did on purpose. Luminosity and Radiance are fanfiction. I didn’t invent Rhysel, Julie did; Julie also invented Talyn, and his story spends more time focusing on his romance than Rhysel’s did; Ilen’s not a strong enough character to hold up his own entire book until the very end of the plot; Ehail hardly counts because she’s so wispy and much of her book is a vehicle for plot that just happens conveniently nearby her...
But that’s a cop-out. I could have written Luminosity with a rationalist Edward if that had struck my fancy, if I’d been willing to lean a little farther away from the canon conceit. I could have given Bella a son instead of a clone of Renesmee with a less silly name, that was completely open to me to have her make that choice when she had the choice. If Ilen’s too weak to carry a book without help from his sisters and his mother and his niece and his girlfriend (and his brother and his dad, some), why does Ehail hold up hers so much better, when she’s at least as wobbly a personality? (Is it because she has a more supportive love interest? Not entirely.) When I rebooted Elcenia, it was open to me start anywhere. I didn’t need to start with Rhysel, or start with Rhysel’s summoning—I could have written a book about Narax or Revenn or someone first. Heck, writing a book about Narax’s backstory might have been a stronger opening, and I only just now thought of it. Talyn has a lot of complex motivations besides his girlfriend’s existence. Does she really need that many perspective chapters? Does he really need to do so many things because of her? Probably not; and this might make his book weaker or stronger that he does, but the reason I did it that way wasn’t because I made an artistic choice, it was because it felt natural to spend about a third of Talyn’s book in Leekath’s head.
(I’ll try to stick more to Luminosity examples; I don’t know how much Elcenia you’ve read.)
I think I’m reasonably good at keeping tertiary characters of both genders on an even footing. In Luminosity, Mike Newton and Jessica Stanley are equivalents; Sulpicia and Afton are equally irrelevant mates-of-villains-who-matter.
When I promote them to greater importance, my male characters start to fall apart.
Bella finesses Edward’s motivations almost immediately and is too much of a force for him to exert any meaningful pressure however much she loves him, and by the end of Radiance he’s her glorified radio. Jacob is not smart enough or special enough to keep up with Elspeth except in the literal sense of accompanying her throughout some of the story, and he doesn’t even get a chance to win her affection on his own, he coasts on Chelsea’s “help”. Where canon makes Jacob a force to be reckoned with at least as wolves go, I passed him over completely in the first book until the very end, in favor of his sisters who get literally no appearances in the original quartet. My hand wasn’t forced there. I could have made Jacob the alpha and left Rachel and Becky in college and Hawaii where Meyer put them.
Alice is cleverer and more charming than Jasper, Esme is less of a caricature of naive goodness than Carlisle, Emmett’s motivations are shallower than Rosalie’s. Aro is powerful and dangerous, but rather than bother with giving him a competence upgrade to challenge my girls, I threw in an original (female!) witch-vampire wildcard. When I needed a random non-witch Volturi, I picked a name with no attached character out of the back of Breaking Dawn, didn’t know it was a man’s name, and invented a half-sympathetic female dancer instead and had to retcon why she would be called “Santiago”. Maggie the lie detector is important and adorable with a strong voice and a personality. Charles the truth detector—who has comparable presence in canon—is a throwaway vaguely creepy flashback line in the mnemic blast. Liam’s subordinate to Siobhan and Tia’s subordinate to Benjamin—guess which couple gets to do anything meaningful? Heidi and Corin both have combat-relevant powers—guess who’s still relevant at the Volturi’s last stand?
I try to compensate for this. I don’t work that hard, because I have lots of other things to focus on, and I know I’m one author in a literary environment that is pretty thoroughly dominated by other people’s male protagonists, but I do try. The two Elcenia novels I’m currently in the middle of have one male and one female protagonist, and the former’s story is longer—but come to think of it, Mallyn is very thoroughly shaped by the females in his life. He’s closer to his mother than his father; his sisters than his brothers; his girlfriends, crushes and platonic female friends than his male friends. I could disclaim responsibility here too—Mallyn’s not originally mine either, he’s Julie’s, she could have changed that if she’d decided he was gay or more comfortable with his dad or more interested in befriending Kaylo than Korulen, but I’m writing this now. If I want to rebalance this, I need to downplay Sashpark, play up Aaseth, downplay Rithka and play up Nemaar, downplay Finnah and play up Eran, postpone Kimmet’s introduction for as long as I reasonably can and try to build up Mallyn’s relationship with Gyre. I have the tools. But the male characters on that list don’t interest me as much; I don’t want to spend as much time talking to them through Mallyn’s lips.
(It will not surprise anyone, I imagine, that Elcenia has so many characters that I once named 200 of them from memory.)
I can write a variety of male personalities. Talyn and Jacob and—oh, let’s throw in a Goldmage character, Wiar—are all very different from each other and all unambiguous dudes. And all those personalities fracture a little under stress, when I try to zoom in on them. I can make this work for me. Talyn’s unstable, he goes off and does wild and arrogant things and he doesn’t have to act within a very narrow band of character traits for my betas to laugh and go “Talyn is being so Talyn!” Jacob’s an intellectual half-step behind everyone around him because he doesn’t have a vampire brain or massive intellectual gifts; when I don’t know what to do with him, I can have him struggle to catch up. Wiar’s gradually losing his memory and I only have to sustain him for a few more chapters before it would be inconsistent for him to have more than fragments of a personality left at all. And despite the fact that I can cover for myself like that, I wish I knew how to write male characters who were solid all the way through. Who react instead of going fuzzy in my head when things happen to them. Whose perspectives remain plain and whose motives remain followable at times when I’m now tempted to dip into their girlfriends’ perspectives instead. Who have voices, who will talk fluently through me—instead of being lists of traits that I compare mechanically against pressures and histories to see what permissible results get spat out.
[Is this helpful?]
Edit: It just occurred to me that I might be able to remove one of my crutches when I get around to writing some of the gay male protagonists I have waiting in the wings. There’s an Elcenia lead couple of boys I’ll get to once I’m deeper into the politics arc. But then, one of them has a dominant twin sister… you see how hard this is?
What happens if you write a female character then go back and change the pronouns?
I have never tried this. I don’t think it would feel comfortable.
I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere as a way of finding out what background assumptions one has about gender.
Unfortunately, I have no obvious way of tracking down the cite, but I think the author found that when the male characters were given female pronouns, the amount of agency they showed became very unattractive. I don’t remember what the shift was when the male characters were given female pronouns.
On my first reading of Mieville’s Embassytown, I kept getting thrown out of the story because I couldn’t believe the protagonist was female. I think it’s because she was more interested in travel than in people. On the second reading, it wasn’t a problem.
A prominent pop-culture example is the Mass Effect sci-fi game series. Unless Commander Shepard’s gender is directly relevant (such as during romantic subplots), he/she will say the exact same lines whether man or woman.
Over five years and three lengthy and ambitious games, I’ve probably read hundreds of pages of people discussing every aspect of the series and its narrative. The single time I can remember anyone saying that ‘FemShep’ felt a bit off was in direct response to the above observation; outside of that, she was wildly popular and often named as a positive model for the writing of female protagonists.
Tangent: This basically does that. It doesn’t work perfectly on hpmor, though—it swaps the pronouns just fine, but only some of the names, so you have to not only remember that Harry is now Harriet but also do that without being thrown off by the fact that Hermione is still Hermione but with male pronouns. That’s patchable (eg, eg), but I don’t know that it’d be worth the trouble.
I wonder how you’d do if you were writing (smart) children to whom most grownup sexual issues were theoretical.
Grownup sexual issues in the sense of acquainting one’s genitalia with someone else’s body parts are (mostly) theoretical for (not too precocious) children! Issues of one’s sex are decidedly NOT. From a very, very young age—maybe for boys it doesn’t become non-theoretical until middle school, but I’d laugh at the idea that girls aren’t hyperconscious of gender expectations after the age of about five. MOR!Hermione is constantly comparing her relationship with Harry to “Romances” she has read, expecting herself to fill such a role under constant societal encouragement and reinforcement of how girls just act that way and melt in a variety of creative manners whenever they so much as think momentarily of love. That’s something she never ever would have been exposed to and acting upon if she hadn’t needed to visit McGonagall in December.
That’s why I said ‘sexual’ not ‘gender’.
For many boys, gender is non-theoretical some years earlier than that, thanks to: ① adults pointing them at “boys’ toys” (trucks, guns, rockets, army men, footballs) and away from “girls’ toys” (dolls, ponies, kitchenware, jump ropes), and ② other kids, notably older kids, teasing boys as “sissies” or “girls” (!) if they stray too much outside of gender roles.
One time I wrote a short story where the child protagonist and eir best friend literally do not have genders yet, does that count?
This post has been very educational to me. The people in my head are either direct copies of me or opaque blocks of remembered behavior by others. I’m not even confident I can tell the difference if someone else is writing them. The fact that it works like this for you is humbling. I wonder how much of that is talent, and how much is skill...
Most of it is practice. I’ve had the named characters kicking around in my head for much of my waking time for years.
Inverse Utility Monster: deliberately goes through hell, returns superpowered.
Wise Villain: doesn’t make heroes’ lives difficult, keeps them underpowered.
Vegeta from Dragon Ball once deliberately had himself beat to near-death for that very reason.
Specifically:
So, by this law, Harry and the Weasley twins disturbing Neville outside the Hogwarts Express on the first day was the objectively right thing to do?
If they’d known the true consequences with certainty in advance… sure.
Why?
EDIT:
In a public debate, yes, that is bad form.
But getting emotional, crying and running off does not necessarily merit penalty points in a human interaction, and certainly not for 12 year old girls who have recently been threatened with a lengthy term of prison/torture, and finds that her best friend and savior had a hidden and close relationship with someone who wanted to do horrible things to her. Violation of basic trust and in group solidarity.
Yes, but I wasn’t sure you did that on purpose.