'Tis a Puzzlement

[kerravonsen]

Oh, Harry Potter fans and Brits, and those who happen to be both, lend me your wisdom!
I've come across a couple of things in HP stories I've read recently, things which puzzle me.

A. Dementors
The assertion that "Dementors feed on happy thoughts". When I came across this the first time, I thought it was an aberration, a misinterpretation, but when I came across it a second time, it obviously isn't a solitary one. Where did people get this idea? To me, it seems the complete opposite of what canon tells us. Dementors don't feed on happy thoughts, they feed on despair. Or, more precisely, they create despair and feed on souls.
How could Dementors feed on happy thoughts when happy thoughts (in the form of a Patronus) drive them away?
How could they feed on happy thoughts when people who have lots of unhappy thoughts (such as Harry) are more vulnerable to them?

Is it that people give that interpretation because they think that "evoking worst memories" is equivalent to "destroying happy thoughts" which is equivalent to "feeding on happy thoughts"? But I don't think that's the case at all.

My personal theory about Dementors is that Dementors bring up people's worst memories because they need to induce despair, suicidal despair, in order to more easily consume someone's soul.

B. Forms of Address

"Miss Granger" versus "Granger" versus "Hermione":
1) "Miss Granger" is the most formal (yes)
2) "Hermione" is the least formal and most friendly (yes)
3) "Granger" is less formal and more friendly than "Miss Granger" (huh?)

That last is what puzzles me, though I've come across it more than once in Severus Snape/Hermione Granger stories; that Snape calling her "Granger" is a form of respect and/or friendliness, and that when he goes back to calling her "Miss Granger" it's an indication that their relationship has gone a step backwards.
Maybe my puzzlement is due to the fact that I'm not British, but I thought that the Surname form of address is less friendly than the full honorific; certainly Snape doesn't mean it in any friendly manner when he addresses Harry as "Potter". I thought the Surname form of address is one that emphasises the Teacher-Student dynamic, while the Honorific-Surname form of address, while being more formal, is also more polite, and thus in some ways is more friendly.

Any Brits care to enlighten me?

Comments

[persephone-kore.livejournal.com]

The assertion that "Dementors feed on happy thoughts". When I came across this the first time, I thought it was an aberration, a misinterpretation, but when I came across it a second time, it obviously isn't a solitary one. Where did people get this idea?

I couldn't tell you exactly where, offhand, but I think it's because somebody described it that way in the books. I remember finding the food/repellent situation puzzling too, but in "How does that work?" terms rather than "Where'd readers get that idea?" terms. (At one point I wrote a drabble suggesting it was like breathing, and pure oxygen being a poison, but more dramatic. Or something.)

I thought the Surname form of address is one that emphasises the Teacher-Student dynamic, while the Honorific-Surname form of address, while being more formal, is also more polite, and thus in some ways is more friendly.

I am not British, but as I understand it, the surname-only form of address is also (or has also been) used between classmates, sometimes friends. (May vary with context. I think.) The formality is "more polite," but it's probably only "friendlier" if the surname-only version was being used in an unfriendly way. Basically, dropping the honorific and addressing someone by surname only is friendly if you're friends and disrespectful if you're on bad terms, and otherwise just... umm... casual? Much as addressing someone by their first name only can mean you're friends or that you're being intrusive and inappropriately intimate.

[reapermum.livejournal.com]

Normally the honorific was only dropped for males, but in these days of equality I suppose it's been extended to females.

The honorific is formal, surname is friendly, first name is familiar. Or at least that's how I've always understood it.

[miamadwyn.livejournal.com]

"Miss Granger" is what he called her when she was a student, which indicates an unequal relationship, and emphasizes the fact that he was her teacher.

You might notice that the students call each other by surnames, "Potter" or "Malfoy," for example, and while it's true that seems more male, it's also true that adult equals in situations like the military, police force, etc. often call each other by surname regardless of gender. For that matter, there were several friends of mine in high school who sometimes called me by my surname.

So it depends on how the writer wants to use it, but in general I think in ss/hg, "Miss Granger" is not treating her as an equal, "Granger" is treating her as an equal but perhaps not particularly friendly (though that can vary with context). Hermione may or may not be friendly/affectionate, or may just be matter-of-fact.

[linda-joyce.livejournal.com]

Well I don't recall it being said that Dementors feed on happy thoughts but I can see why some one might have thought that. They absorb all happy/good thoughts leaving only sadness and despair in their place and I agree with reapermum as regards to the naming of people. Think on it as B7. Alphas use surnames with acquaintances, first names with close friends and probably surnames with an honorific for seniors or strangers. First names are also used for children and social inferiors for example women(Jenna and Cally)%)

[reapermum.livejournal.com]

First names are also used for children and social inferiors

And Vila. Thus proving that Gan is a higher grade than Vila.

[linda-joyce.livejournal.com]

Exactly, as a delta Vila is as low as they come. It might also indicate that Gan is an off worlder, his 'status' is a little difficult to define so everyone errs on the side of politeness.

[reapermum.livejournal.com]

Years ago, when I taught in a boys' school, we addressed the pupils by their surnames. Which equals formality with an inferior, I assume.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

Not quite as low as they come. There were bond slaves, people who were owned by others.

But yes, I always have Gan as a Gamma.

[linda-joyce.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, I forgot those, probably because the only one we saw was off world.
I don't associate them with the Domes.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

And there was Marryatt's family, sold into slavery. A very nasty way of getting government revenue.

[linda-joyce.livejournal.com]

I thought they were sold into slavery off world not within the domes. Yes a very nasty way to balance the governments books.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

There are probably bond slaves in the domes too, as status symbols. Look at how Rashel was dressed. I bet they're fashionable amongst Alphas and ambitious Betas.

[linda-joyce.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't be surprised, the Federations equivalent of the 40 somethings Harley Davidson. %P

[etakyma.livejournal.com]

In Prisoner of Azkaban we get the following descriptions of dementors:

"Dementors are among the foulest creatures that walk this earth. They infest the darkest, filthiest places, they glory in decay and despair, they drain peace, hope, and happiness out of the air around them. Even Muggles feel their presence, though they can't see them. Get too near a Dementor and every good feeling, every happy memory will be sucked out of you. If it can, the Dementor will feed on you long enough to reduce you to something like itself...soul-less and evil. You will be left with nothing but the worst experiences of your life." (Chapter 10)

"They feed on positive human emotions; a large crowd is like a feast to them. They drain a wizard of his powers if left with them too long. They are the guards at Azkaban and make that place horrible indeed. There are certain defenses one can use against Dementors, specifically the Patronus Charm. A Dementor's breath sounds rattling and like it's trying to suck more than air out of a room. Its hands are "glistening, grayish, slimy-looking, and scabbed". It seems to exude cold." (Chapter 5)

And "A Dementor's last and worst weapon is called the Dementor's Kiss. The Dementor puts back its hood and clamps its jaws on the mouth of the victim and sucks out his soul, leaving him an empty shell, alive but completely, irretrievably "gone."" (Chapter 12)

As for *why* the Patronus charm works when they feed on that sort of thing, I don't know. It is not logical. But perhaps it is that the Patronus is a "distilled" form of the positive thoughts of the caster? Or maybe that it is the thoughts along with power that makes it a repellant for the Dementor?

[kerravonsen]

Ah, thanks for the exact quotes, that makes things clearer.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

Re surnames, I think this is one of those things that depends very much on context, eg period or class. And someone once said to me that one of the problems of the Rowling books is that they combine an old-fashioned boarding school story with more contemporary mores (the fact that girls and boys are taught together, for instance, which is not impossible in an earlier setting but would be unusual), so that might lead to confusion on forms of address.

In a pre-war boys' boarding school, I would certainly expect boys to be addressed by their surname, by both masters and fellow-pupils; in a girls' boarding school, I would probably expect mistresses to use Miss Surname. In a modern school, I would expect teachers to address pupils by forename, regardless of gender.

Before I went to Oxford, the college wrote to me saying they had been asked by a university women's group to enquire how I would like to be addressed in correspondence: eg Miss M. J. Smith, Miss Mary Smith, or plain Mary Smith. I gave this some thought and replied that I would like to be addressed in the same way as the men, but with "Miss" substituted for "Mr" where appropriate. As far as I could make out, they never took any notice of this, and simply addressed all correspondence to M. J. Smith (for men) and Miss M. J. Smith (for women). The difference irritated me, probably more because they'd asked me, and if they'd followed through on my reply I should have got initials and surname.

So if Snape normally addresses all male pupils by surname and Hermione suspects him of sexism, I can see that she might be pleased to be addressed in the same terms as male pupils, and that she might see the re-introduction of a female-only honorific as condescension.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

in a girls' boarding school, I would probably expect mistresses to use Miss Surname.

According to the old school stories I used to read, many of which were pre-war, the girls were always first name only, to the teachers as well. It was so at the Marlow girls' school, Kingscote, which was post-war, and at by boarding school for that matter. What did they do at yours?

I would be angry too. Being addressed as Miss or Mrs also annoys me. It should be Ms, making it the same as Mr: merely an honorific and not an indication of one's relationship to a man.

I thought much the same about Hermione; she'd appreciate the indication of equality. :-)

[watervole.livejournal.com]

"Being addressed as Miss or Mrs also annoys me. It should be Ms, making it the same as Mr: merely an honorific and not an indication of one's relationship to a man."

People should have the choice. I actually prefer being 'Mrs'. But I'd be quite happy to have an equivalent for men that indicates they are married.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

:-) So would I, but it's extremely unlikely they'd go for it. However just using no titles (unless it's Doctor or Professor) is much easier.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

I answer to Miss, Mrs and Ms, as I think there's a case for all three (and after all, all three are an abbreviation of Mistress). I accept Miss, because I'm an unmarried woman; and Mrs, because at one time - certainly up to the seventeenth century - that was the form of address for all women, married or not, and I think that's a sensible practice (cf modern use of Frau for a woman and Fraulein for a girl); and Ms as that's the current convention. If pressed, I generally go for Miss, but I'd rather skip titles altogether and stick with forename (or initials) plus surname.

I found out recently that the reason why my brother always uses forename plus surname in emails - which does seem a bit odd between siblings - is that his Quaker school taught him that that formula addressed the whole person.

[vilakins.livejournal.com]

I'd rather skip titles altogether and stick with forename (or initials) plus surname.

That's what I do, and it seems to be becoming quite widespread here.

I've known people, usually called John, who were always addressed by both names.

[hawkeye7.livejournal.com]

When I went to school, you were addressed by other pupils and by the masters by your surname always. Only your closest friends used (or even knew) your first name. Application of an honoric indicated extreme displeasure.

[pinkdormouse.livejournal.com]

In my experience, the naming thing depends on so many external factors that learning the rules can take forever. My experiences

Honorific Surname implies either formality or distancing (possibly with emphasis on the difference in social standing between the sddresser and the addressee)

Surname alone implies somewhat less formality, or can be a shorthand once the Honorific Surname form has ben used at least once in reference to that person. I see it very much as a carry-over from public school and or the military when used in conversation as opposed to news reports

First Name (Middle Name) Surname is generally used either when confirming the identity of a person (Hermione Granger? I haven't seen you in years! You've certainly changed since Hogwarts!) or a more extreme form of distancing/expressing displeasure (Hermione Jane Granger! How could you turn Draco Malfoy into a cocker spaniel!

First Name alone definitely implies informality, although it's becoming quite common to use it in emails even to quite important business contacts (I'll still use a more formal version when requesting someting that has the potential to be refused, though)

Does any of that help?

[jhall1.livejournal.com]

I agree with you on B. I'm afraid that I can't shed any light on A.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

Demontors - it's probably people who have read the book so long ago that they've forgotten it.

'Granger' - this will be the boarding school traditions whereby boys are traditionally addressed by their surname by teachers. As you say 'Potter'.

A quick check though the books seems to indicate that 'Miss Granger' would be used more often - probably an echo of courtesy to women. (in my school, boys were address by their surnames and girls by their first names)

However, when dealing with pupils, most of the teachers seem to use 'Weasley' in general and 'Mr Weasley' when wanting to make a point.

So, that would fit in with Snape using 'Miss Granger when feeling annoyed with her - not as more formal, but more as a put-down.

'Granger' or 'Miss Granger' in a normal tone of voice would rate identically.

Hear the phrase with a strong emphasis on the first word "If MISS Granger would care to enlighten us?" (Think of him as giving her a title when he's feeling sarcastic)

[jaxomsride.livejournal.com]

The Granger epithet is more hearking back to the boarding school mentality where everyone uses a surname Masters and Pupils alike.
So Granger is more likely to be "friendlier" than Miss Granger as a Master would use "Miss Granger" if she was in trouble.

PS

[jaxomsride.livejournal.com]

The "Miss" would also be used to emphasise her youth.