#nobody is perfectly morally pure we are all human it's much better to foster communities in which we are able to fuck up and learn and grow

[rollercoasterwords]

Have no clue if you’re still on The Prank discourse but one thing I find so interesting about it is how much it emotionally affects people compared to something like Regulus being a canonical blood supremacist or Barty torturing people or other more traditional bad guys. And I think a lot has to do with how it affects two characters that people often project themselves into (Remus and Snape) rather than just being a generic “oh ya he tried to murder someone we hear about for a line or two.” Like people don’t approach it from a literary or a character standpoint, they often seem to see it as something that wronged THEM. It’s so fascinating to me- the epitome of how one attempted murder is a tragedy but the attempted murder of many that I don’t happen to care about is an easily ignored statistic.

of COURSE i am happy to continue talking about The Prank u bring up a really interesting point!! i do think a lot of the things that become these big like...moral debates in this fandom have less to do with like. actual morality and more to do with like....constructing identity through social media. like god ok let me see if i can be concise abt this:

we're being increasingly conditioned to construct our identities around online presence and social signifiers like the media we consume; so for a lot of people the books they read or the shows they watch etc etc are not just something to enjoy but are a pillar around which they are constructing their perceptions of themself. and in order to reify that construction you basically have to put yourself in this constant feedback loop of posting these social signifiers so that other people can look at them and go "oh so this is your identity," because a performance can't be real without an audience.

SO. i feel like that's where we're getting people who will say "oh yeah i'm a [character] kin" and feel as though that is truly an important expression of their deepest personal selves. and then, once your identity is tied to those characters, any attack on those characters feels like an attack on you. you can't accept the fact that other people might interpret the characters differently, because to do so would mean to accept that this thing you've tied your identity to is somewhat meaningless/empty/fluid/unstable, which would force you to confront the fact that this identity you're performing is, in fact, a performance, and not a revealing of some true and inherent inner self.

in reality, all of the things that happen in harry potter do not hold any real-life moral weight. like...these actions aren't happening. we aren't talking about real people doing real things to each other, we're talking about characters. so to use an example from ur message, barty killing his dad is no better or worse than The Prank, because neither of those things actually happened. and THAT means that everybody can take those fictional actions and interpret them in different ways and say they think one is better or worse within this fictional context, but there is no single true and correct interpretation, because none of this is real.

so, yeah. i think ur 100% right that when we do get these really contentious debates about the morality of certain characters, it's because people aren't approaching the topic through the lens of literary critique but rather through the lens of this Personal Moral Performance. like, if you kin sirius, and someone says sirius was bad for doing The Prank, then you HAVE to defend sirius and insist that that person is wrong, because u need to perform ur own moral correctness to the audience. like, sirius can't be a morally bad character, because i kin sirius, and i am morally good.

and yeah, that definitely leads to some cognitive dissonance! people are going to be quick to defend the characters they've attached themselves to while decrying the bad actions of the characters they don't like/don't care about--again, oftentimes to perform Morality on the internet more than in service of any actual literary critique. and like. if ur stuck in this mindset of feeling like you need to be constantly proving to the world how morally good you are, then anyone pointing out the fact that you defend one character but shit on another who did similar things is gonna feel like a personal attack, and that just makes the whole situation worse because then you feel like you need to dig your heels in and insist that your interpretations are right and their interpretations are wrong, and nobody feels like they can give ground without becoming Problematic for defending/shitting on whatever character they're fighting about.