(no subject)

[avevale_intelligencer]

I remember being very upset when Richard Harris died, not because he and I were particularly close (or even aware of each other at all) or because I thought he was a very great actor (though I never found his performances less than enjoyable and engaging), but because in my perception the main emotion being evinced among HP fandom was “Great, now they can get someone decent to play Dumbledore.” This perception was corrected when I commented upon it, but I still feel it wasn’t entirely unfounded. Whether those who expressed that wish feel that it has been gratified I do not know: personally, I think Michael Gambon is a good actor in the wrong part. However.

I do not see cause for rejoicing in anyone’s death, real or fictional. Death achieves nothing. If Osama bin Laden, wherever he may be, were to keel over and die tomorrow, it would detract in no way from the threat of religious extremism. If Hitler had died but the Nazi regime had survived, it might have become even more of a threat than it was. If Voldemort dies, there will still be Dark wizards and former Death Eaters out there, any one of whom might step into his shoes and become an even greater terror than he was.

ffutures said recently that he wished Buffy had stayed dead in subsequent seasons of the series that bore her name. Several people agreed: I obviously disagree. While I may not have been too enamoured of the character or the actress, I don’t find that sufficient ground to wish her dead, and there also seems little ground for supposing that if she had not been resurrected the show would have been better written. (Why?)

It’s currently popular to be very cosmic-minded about death. It’s a necessary and even desirable part of life, apparently, it makes life bearable (a little late, surely?), it’s an awfully big adventure and the gateway to the next level and all that jazz. To me it’s just the guarantee that I will stop living and experiencing at some point: nothing else is known about it. It’s just an end. There are dark times when I welcome that end, but I recognise that at such times my worldview is skewed. In my ground state, I want to live and be at most middle-aged forever and (having heard all the arguments about overpopulation and alleged boredom and all the rest of it, so please don’t) I see no reason why I shouldn’t. I have brought no lives into this world (not that I believe that should be a criterion--I do not): why should I surrender mine if I’m not done with it?

It is no secret that a character on the side of light dies in the latest Harry Potter book. I have seen no-one, no-one, express anything but obscene glee at this development. Maybe my perception is off yet again. I don’t know. I just find it slightly sad.

Comments

Re: Two cents' worth

[zanda-myrande.livejournal.com]

Um, I get that. I am not objecting to the death in story terms. I would probably not have written it that way, but then as everybody knows I am a dull and pedestrian writer whose stories are so free of drama and excitement that they can even be safely read to people over 21.

What I am objecting to is the metaphorical dancing on the character's grave on the part of some of the readership, and the general attitude that any individual's death, real or fictional, might be desirable. In the heat of passion it might be understandable, but not at any other time.

I know about eucatastrophe. Mine died, but then I never watered it properly. But see Gandalf on the subject of death and life and who deserves what for Tolkien's take on the attitude I'm on about.