I don't get you sometimes, fandom

[laurus_nobilis]

Yes, I know I should be writing instead of reading Harry Potter forums. I guess I deserved the headache, although I didn't think I'd find many reasons to headdesk in a sane place like the Sugar Quill. But the way HP fandom treats villains creeps me out.


Before I begin, and just to be perfectly clear: I don't think there's anything wrong with liking the villains. Just because I tend to prefer the good guys doesn't mean I can't understand that people like the bad guys, especially because there are some really fascinating bad guys out there (though I'm not very fond of any of the HP ones). The thing is, most people who like villains like them because they're villains. Most people who like rival pairings like them because there's a lot of tension in the mix of love/attraction and opposite views. Or views that are just beginning to show they're opposite, depending on the timeline, but the point remains.

And then there are people who insist that the bad guys aren't really that bad, and make me wonder why don't they just go fangirl the good guys instead of justifying characters who are obviously batshit.

The Grindelwald thread is one scary place because of how it subtly changes along the way. (Appropriate, I guess, but still creepy.)

First there's a perfectly innocent discussion about Grindelwald vs. Voldemort and which one was worse. I agree completely that Voldie was even worse. They both were genocidal maniacs and they both were evil since they were young, yes, but Grindelwald kinda sorta repented a teensy little bit in the end while Voldie refused to do it. And there was the whole thing about splitting his soul in many little pieces. Even from a purely narrative point of view, it makes sense that the new threat is worse than the old threat.

So far so good. But then it starts getting creepy when people begin talking about the era's general views, and how it was understandable that he'd believe in wizards' superiority. Understandable? Maybe. Justifiable? Hell NO. Dumbledore had the same views as him, they say, and it's true.

It'd be nice if they also remembered that Dumbledore stopped himself from turning into an evil dictator and Grindelwald didn't even try.

But he's still not entirely evil! He isn't doing it because he enjoys being evil: even if his acts are terrible, he's still convinced that it's all for the Greater Good.

... uh, guys? That doesn't make him less evil. That makes him FUCKING BATSHIT.

Oh, but wait, it gets better. While people spend all their time arguing about the political side of his acts, and how he got his views, and the influence of the times he lived in... no one seems to remember the little details that no amount of context can justify or even explain.

I guess I imagined that bit where a school with a reputation for teaching the Dark Arts didn't want him anymore.

Or the unimportant, throwaway scene when 16-year-old ickle Gellert uses the Cruciatus Curse on a young teen. And not just any kid, either. We're talking about his boyfriend's little brother here.

Yeah, that was totally for the Greater Good.

Seriously, fandom. Think about it for a moment. Dumbledore was a teenage idiot in love and still managed to realize he was dangerous and insane - why can't the readers do it?


Aaaargh. It's CoS and Tom Riddle all over again. "He was just a misunderstood woobie!" Yeah, a misunderstood woobie who killed a little girl in cold blood when he was sixteen, but I guess that was okay because Myrtle was annoying anyway. But mostly because the only bit of CoS that stuck to some people's brains was HE WAS SOOO HOT.


ETA: I remembered I'd promised I'd keep meta-ish posts public. Oops. It's unlocked now.

Comments

[cygna-hime.livejournal.com]

See, I like evil/amoral characters because they're interestingly batshit. I find it fascinating to look at how someone could arrive at a conclusion ("Wizards should rule the world") via a chain of assumptions and deductions that seem, from the inside, to be completely sensible. Of course they think they're justified! Of course they think it's all for the Greater Good! And it can be heaps of fun to get inside their heads and show them believing they're completely in the right. At least, I think it's heaps of fun.

But that doesn't change the fact that, from the outside, they are in the wrong. Period. That's non-negotiable: killing, torturing, and messing with people's minds is Wrong, capital W, no matter who's doing it and no matter why.

I'm a villain sympathizer; I like to treat villains as people, with feelings and motivations like the heroes, because they are. To me, every villain is a hero who could have been, and vice versa. But I'm not a villain apologist; some things are just wrong, morally and ethically wrong, and should never be forgotten. I can understand how the villains would feel they were right, but that doesn't mean I agree. Understanding wrong actions does not make them less wrong. Even seeing how I might have done the same doesn't make it right--because I admit that I would have done wrong.

Wow, you got a screed. Sorry about that. I just...really like characters of uncertain morality. "Grindelwald's behavior made sense to him at the time, and you can kind of understand how he got the ideas he did"? Sure! "Grindelwald was just a big soppy really"? No!

Now there's probably going to be a long post about this in my LJ. I hope you're happy.

[mon-starling.livejournal.com]

I feel sort of guilty for my unrepentant Grindelwald loving - not because I make apologies for his evil ways (cause yeah, he's a sociopathic little bastard) but because of all the "OMG your Gellert is shoooo cuuuuute!!!!1" from thirteen year-old fangirls who are - like young Dumbledore - blinded by his pretty boy curls. So yes, I understand your point, and I agree with you - the whole "but he's a poor little woobie" thing is what put me off shipping Buffy/Spike back then, after all...

[solesakuma]

First: this is the fandom that gave us 'I'm a racist only in HP, not in real life'. CLAMP fandom tends to do this too. A lot.
That said, I think that many many people have the terms 'understanding' vs. 'justifying' very very confused. And not only regarding fictional characters.
So you can like and analyze and sympathize with villains but that doesn't mean you agree with them. Case in point: I adore Zagard from MKR. However, what he did was wrong, wrong, wrong!
You can understand where did Grindelwald came from and why he thought like he did but that doesn't make him right. You can even make the situation more complex and ask why did he get so far and analyze the part the Wizardry culture played in his rise to power. Heck, it's a lot of 'fun' to ask those questions.
This brings up the scary possibility that maybe some people actually agree with him but I won't get into that.
When I had to write him I was absolutely scared than I'd make him too sympathetic because it was a goddamn drabble and I couldn't fit 'I totally believe Dumbledore did the right thing and that Grindelwald was a sociopathic bastard with a culture to back him up that had to be locked up!' without screwing up the word count.
And I understand the fascination with Grindelwald a lot more than the fascination with Tom 'I'll conquer the world to show my father he should have loved MEEE!' Riddle. XP Voldie-pooh: Proving the need for psychology since 19XX.
It's like the whole 'I hate Clow because he was sooo evil!' reversed. Love and hate characters for what they are, not for what your mind has deluded you to believe they are.

[darkcountess.livejournal.com]

You know I luuuuuuv bad guys. Why? Well, because they are bad!!!! That's the point. I don't try to understand, let alone justify, them. I just find them interesting, no matter if they have Rickman's voice, blonde hair, or if they look like they were hit by a truck.
And it sickens me when people, specially girls, see movieRiddle and think that because he looked good, then he wasn't so bad, or maybe he had a good reason for being, as you said, batshit. As with any man, it's impossible to change them! The idea is to see past the long eyelashes and possible justifications... and if you still like them, like I do, cool. Like the villain, not the idea of a lost, mislead man in search of love and redemption, when he's obviously not all that!!!!