So I was looking at this year Hugos and in the Best Related Work category among nominated works, there was a series of posts by Sarah Gailey called The Women of Harry Potter.

Of course, I've felt obligated to have a look at something like that. It turned out to be a really insightful collection of character analysis and considering that it seems that it was never linked here I thought that DLPers may appreciate it. Especially the post about the most prominent black character in the series - Hermione.

 

You mean tan?

Had a quick look at that Hermione article and, honestly, I don't see anything there that hasn't been extolled in a 1000 Harmony fics. Hermione is JK's SI. Yes. Thank you. We've noticed.

But I suppose we can't expect the... Hugo Council (?) to read HP fics. Though I'd certainly rather read fanfic than those articles.

 

Oh boy. The Hermione is black supporters.

 

I thought they were joking when I first heard about it.

 

I've learned to never assume anyone is joking these days. The world is becoming a crazier place everyday, my friend.

 

This thread is some low-effort trolling, Sataniel.

Then again, so is that article on Hermione. Every single picture is black!Hermione, totally disregarding any other version, but on top of that, most of the pictures of Harry have him black as well. Some hard-core denial going on out there...

Personally, I'm more interested in how there's another article on the same site which shows JK's original sketches of the characters... I particularly like the picture where Hermione is standing between Harry and Dean (though he was still named Gary when this was drawn), with the former two looking white as sheets. Heck, Ron looks more black than Hermione in that picture, simply by virtue of his freckles; the only color in Hermione's face is the smear of blue ink where the drawing apparently got wet. Meanwhile, Gary/Dean is obviously shaded to look black, has African facial features, and a matching haircut.

If the Hermione article weren't newer, I'd think the person who submitted the one with the sketches was trolling Gailey with a dose of facts.

I've heard the Hugos have become something of a joke, in recent years. And not the funny kind...

 

Now say that about Parvati Patil, or Cho Chang, or Kingsley. I have no problem with it, except when it's pushed by people who would scream bloody murder if an ethnic character was reinterpreted as white. No one can have nice things anymore.

 

Because it's not really about a different interpretation of a character. It's about the token black actor, that needs to be in a movie/play nowadays or the creators will be called racist. And this has to be regardless of what the characters are in the first place. A few days ago I saw people arguing why there are no black actors in a film about Vikings. This needs to stop, nobody wants white people being cast to play black characters, why is there a need to do the opposite?

 

Yeah, that reminds me the shit Witcher 3 got for not having any "women of colour" in what is basically Middle ages Middle Europe.

 

IIRC Manveer Heir, that shitstain of man, wrote an article about it, completely ignoring the fact that Witcher is based on Eastern European folklore, where black people were rarer than unicorns. But must have ethnic representation.

 

Except of course for all the bits that do contradict it.

I have no problem with people reinterpreting Hermione as black for a fan work.

However, it's the height of intellectual dishonesty to pretend that she was not written as and presented as a white character in canon. There's far too much you need to explain away to interpret Hermione as black in canon, too many times where you need to rely on unnatural use of language (e.g. pretending that turning white in shock can be confused with literally being the colour white, the latter being how Hermione's face is described in PoA, the former being how people try to interpret it, against the clear meaning).

 

Tangentially related but I wondered to what extent, if at all, you think it's important for a work set in Britain to represent the demographics of Britain? Is it less important when (as in HP) we are introducing fantastical elements and a separate population? If an author is from a country where 90% of the people are white should it be a disappointment, or a surprise, that 90% of the characters, main or otherwise, are white? I appreciate these all come across as smug rhetorical questions but I am keen to hear your POV.

 

But why should there be more non-white characters? The story is happening in UK and a quick google search will tell you that 87% of the population there is white. Why should there be an abnormal amount of characters belonging to a different ethnic group? I wouldn't complain about a lack of Caucasian characters in a movie happening in Nigeria.

 

Did you read the link I posted? It has a PoA quote which literally says "Hermione's white face". It doesn't say pale. It doesn't say turning white because of fear. It literally describes the face as white, and the context only further cements the description as one of literal colour, because it is contrasting the colour of her face with her surroundings.

This is what irritates people: not the idea that people want to imagine Hermione as black for their fan works, but the level of denial they exhibit with respect to canon. JKR is not immune to that. Her Twitter comments do not erase what she wrote in the books.

 

There really isn't. There's an argument to be made, but not a reasonable one - as stated above, it depends on interpreting the language use against its normal meaning, against its context, and against normal collocations. With that kind of twisting of words you could pretty much justify any "interpretation" of canon, because you're essentially setting your desires first and changing the world to suit your preference. Example: Dumbledore is actually a woman. What about all the mentions of him being a man? Oh, that's just Harry and the other characters mis-gendering her. What about Dumbledore's beard? Transfiguration. After all, canon never says that Dumbledore is a man! And Dumbledore being a man does not have any impact on the plot.

There is nothing that cannot be justified with sufficient quantities of bullshit. It doesn't make it reasonable.

These two claims are not equivalent, though you keep connecting them. That Hermione's race has no bearing on the story is not the same thing as it being as valid as any other. The former claim is about function, the latter is about facts. There are plenty of elements of canon which do not have an effect on the plot but nonetheless are factual parts of canon. The colours of Gryffindor are red and gold. That part of canon has no functional relationship on the plot. JKR could have picked any colour and the story would be no different. Nonetheless, the interpretation that Gryffindor colours are actually yellow and pink is not an equally valid interpretation of canon.

 

For this to be a troll I would have to pretend to be serious, and even if the rest of the post doesn't convey it, then I think that the last part does.

That's a point which I never understood (and not only in this context). I mean why would characters need to be similar to you? In non-interactive fiction you are an observer, basically, the only time where you need to identify with characters is the wish-fulfilment crap, and as seen through the popularity of stuff like SAO among the western audience - it doesn't really matter. To stop the "but you are white male" line of discussion. I largely consume Japanese entertainment, which mostly has Japanese protagonists.

Also, you mention kids, but I think this matters even less to kids. And I think that the fact that often protagonists in kids-aimed media aren't even human, but anthropomorphized animals and such is ample proof of that.

Also, race-swapping has to make sense, I will never forget the completely retarded "cast Asian as Iron Fist" movement.