I’ve been mulling over a few comments on Cantata about how self-absorbed Hermione seems to be. At first, I thought maybe I’d overdone what I’m trying to express — I won’t rule that out — but I think the issue lies elsewhere.
I’d read an article about how readers often apply the “friend” concept to female protagonists. As in, “she’s ok, but I wouldn’t want to be friends with her.” I’ve known a few chicks like Hermione. Logical. Bookish. Trusting in knowledge of theory over actual experience (ok, that might be me). And smart women, like Hermione — nerds, geeks — they make odd friends. They might not be your first pick for window shopping or boozing. I think a lot of people would prefer a day at the mall with Lavender. She’d be fun, you know? Over, say, an afternoon in a used bookshop with Hermione.
I had a non-fandom buddy critique the story so far, sort of a reality-check on style. I know she’s a non-fan because she gets Snape’s name wrong consistently and seems awkward about HP names in general. She’d read the comments along the way and said, “But it’s a story about about Hermione’s life and it’s direction. Of course she’s self-interested.”
I’d thought about that. We’re in Harry’s head (or limited 3rd person); we never get in Hermione’s head. Everything we see of her is through the eyes of Harry. We’re reduced to inference. There’s a good argument that Harry is self-absorbed. It’s happening to him; he’s the one who’s the target.
A feminist reading suggests we’re more accepting of male characters being self-interested, particularly in casual fiction. If Harry were Harriet, would we be bothered by her self-absorption? For that matter, is that a significant element in the uniqueness of Harriet the Spy?