sure is pretentious up in here

[luciazephyr]

Okay, so a long time ago I wrote a short post about Harry and his Issues. I was thinking about posting an extended version of that to the official forums to gauge fan reaction and see how others interpret the series.

So here is the revised version of that post. I want to make it as... friendly as I can, while still being critical. If anyone can think of improvements I could slip in, I'd be open to them.

A Critical Look at Harry Dresden's Capital I-Issues

Disclaimer: I love these books. I really, really do. That said, I am a very critical reader and enjoy extrapolating text and subtext to get a clearer image of the universe inside the story and what it says about the world. I'm also a big believer in the Death of the Author (ie: the text is the only resource, all Word of God is moot). This is going to be critical of the books, but that does not mean I'm being critical of Mr. Butcher or of anyone who disagrees with me. All interpretations all valid, I believe. And everything to follow is just my interpretation.

Okay? Cool.


Harry has got serious issues with sex and gender. This is something acknowledged in the text, but not to the extent I think is warranted. Then again, Harry Dresden is not one for introspection, is he?

But that does not preclude us looking at his issues and trying to piece together why they exist. In doing so, I have what I think is a pretty good theory on the topic. I'm not sure if it was Mr. Butcher's intention of writing Harry this way, but everything does fit together rather neatly.

So lets outline what I'm talking about here:

-Relentless heteronormativity, even given Harry's habit of appreciating the physique of men
-A negative view of sex
-A deep want for a stereotypical monogamous relationship

Let me give an example of each.

Heteronormativity: Chivalry is just a fancy word for sexism, and Harry is confronted with this by Murphy and others throughout the series, but never gets better on the issue. Harry treats people very differently due to their gender and throws around a lot of "bitch"es and indulges in some skeevy attitudes. For a good example of this, look to Proven Guilty, where Harry remains fixated on Molly's body and clothing choices for a good half of the book, going so far as to call her "frankenhooker," which was a bit beyond the pale, even for him. At the same time, Harry is rather... complimentary to his male friends. When he's always ready to let the readers know how ripped Billy, Michael, and Sanya are.

Which is not be saying Harry's gay. Not at all. I think he reads as a rather repressed bisexual, but as being heterosexual is a big part of his personal identity, he doesn't show interest outside a wandering, appreciative eye.


Negative view of sex: All over the books. Thematically, in the series, sex is a bad thing. One of the earliest instances of this is when Harry witnesses Bianca and her lover in Storm Front. The scene is play very much for titillation, but Harry's reaction is one of disgust and discomfort. In Harry's world, sex is a Bad Thing with few exceptions. For a male protagonist, he is often menaced by women in a sexual way. The Red Court and White Court are both deeply rooted sexual predation. The Winter Court also gets in on this with Maeve and Lea. Lea in particular, actually. Lea doing bad things is often given a squicky sexual twist (see: Grave Peril) that Harry finds off-putting.


The White Picket Fence Ideal: Harry is deeply monogamous. Recall that in Proven Guilty, Harry and Murphy actually have a very serious Relationship Discussion, and Harry's hesitation stems from his need for a stable, comfortable bond that's rooted in stereotype. His wants are so transparent, Murphy is fully aware of them and lets him know they wouldn't work out because of his inability to compromise in this.


That's what I'm talking about. These are all just small examples of Harry's attitudes on things. None of the above are really healthy outlooks for him.

But here's the kicker. Each and every one of them makes perfect sense when you evaluate them with Harry's past history in mind.


Harry's origin story, particularly his time with Justin, is rooted in betrayal of consent. Justin took Harry in and gave him a home and manipulated Harry and Elaine to be bound to each other, pretty much setting Harry up with his adoptive sister. Harry's story really kicks off when Justin violated his trust and attempted to invade and change his mind.

As we know, Harry ran to his Godmother for aid, and she did a ritual on him (sort of, it's complicated). In the flashback to this, it's also heavily implied she took advantage of Harry while he was bound, bleeding, and assaulted with glamour.

(This is further evidenced by Mab's initiation of Harry as her Knight later, which sets an unsettling precedent about how soul-binding deals are forged between humans and Fae.)

So three major things happened in a very short amount of time. His surrogate father tried to invade his mind, his surrogate sister and lover was turned against him and he was left believing he killed her, and his Godmother took advantage of him when he was defenseless. He was hurt sexually, emotionally, and mentally. These character defining events code heavily as rape. They took away his free will and agency, and with Elaine's "death", he lost everyone he loved. Not for the first time, either.


Let's add that back up with his issues, detailed above. Harry gets incredibly hostile when his autonomy is threatened. His language describing sex around him is often negative. He looks down on promiscuousness, especially with Molly and with the Alphas in "Day Off". He clearly and plainly wants love and affection throughout the series, but is absolutely unwilling to compromise his boundaries to get it. At the same time, he does have subtextual attraction to men occasionally and could read as a closeted bisexual to some (myself included, but I understand not everyone agrees there).

His backstory revolves around a rape metaphor, and his lingering issues regarding that past are not aided by later events. He is gangraped by the Red Court in Grave Peril. "Shelia" takes a leaf out of Justin's book and invades him mind in a sexual manner in Dead Beat. The White Court's attempts to feast on him go without saying. When he finally breaks out of his mold and starts a relationship with Luccio, it explodes in his face and has him used as an unwilling accessory of rape against her. (Which has interesting parallels to his previous relationship with Elaine.)


In my opinion, it's no wonder Harry has these issues. Sex is a dangerous thing to him, and he's been violated in many different ways in his past. He's part of a society that touts Free Will as paramount, but when he's taken on the Stone Table by Mab in Changes, he doesn't even register it as a violation. Hell, by then, he'd been wronged in plenty of worse ways, right? He talks about mortal free will with reverence, but when his own is compromised, he often brushes it off as a fact of life. To him (and to much of the supernatural community), the loss of free will is the cost of doing business in their world.

It's no wonder that Harry seeks out heteronormative, monogamous relationships. To him, it must seem like they are in a way "safer" and put him in a dominant role where he's less likely to be hurt for the umpteenth time. That's not to say he wants to dominate his partner, but he's afraid of being subservient in any way. Of course he aims for that "perfect" man-woman relationship that he codes as the norm. In reality, such a relationship doesn't often exist. By seeking out an ideal instead of a reality, he protects himself.


Those are my deep, thinky thoughts on Harry Dresden. I hope some of you found them interesting food for thought, even if you don't agree with them. I find analyzing the issues of The Dresden Files really interesting, and Harry is just the tip of that iceberg.

Well? What do ya'll think?

Comments

[everbright]

You might want to make it clearer that being a 'critical reader' is akin to being a critical thinker, and not a just a picky person. I read it the correct way, but it would be easy to misinterpret.

Otherwise, AWESOME. Some people are going to find just the mention of Harry being Bi threatening (Insecuuuu~uure), but that's just life and that observation a integral part of your analysis here. I like it!

[polarisnorth]

The scene is play -- should be "played."

I think it's a good post and there are a lot of valid points here (and you know I agree with your interpretation), but I can't help worrying that the forums are going to be a lot less friendly to an approach like this. *sigh* I hope it goes down all right.

[samjohnsson]

Pretty much agree with all of it.

That said? Hostile audience go!

[schneefink]

Definitely interesting food for thought. Thanks!

Iirc, Harry didn't realize until Summer Knight that he and Elaine had been set up by Justin, right? As far as I remember he still saw Elaine as his romantic love ideal from the past until they were betrayed by Justin, so basically what he's still looking for. Only it's not Elaine anymore, even though she's alive. I'd have to read that book again.
I hope we get the second part of the backstory one day, I'm sure it'll be very interesting.

[randomcat]

Just wandered in trying to re0find my link to MOC, and thought this was interesting.
Did you ever post it in forums?
For the record, I agree with most of it.
I get that Harry doesn't ping bisexual for a lot of people, but then, this society doesn't acknowlege bisexuality to the degree that it occurs anyway. Given that most people are in the gray area between hetero and homo, and very few actually believe that, making up other trendy fad words to explain the natural impulses that come with it, that's not surprising. It's a cultural thing to do with loaded labels, rather than an expression of sexuality. oh, well.

I do disagree with your definition of chivalry as sexism. I believe the two to be discrete attitudes. Not that it can't or doesn't often act as a cover for sexism, but chivalry is essentially an urge to protect, please and serve, so an outer focused impulse, or social behavior; but sexism is essentially defensive, even when it's expressed as an attack, so it's an expression of egocentrism, or antisocial behavior. imo.

The last is a little more complicated.
"going so far as to call her "frankenhooker"
I disagree, categorically. The reference didn't describe Molly, but her style. The distinction is important for several reasons involving Harry's issues with sex, sexuality, and his chivalry.
Harry has real body and exposure issues; he wears layers. Like many abuse victims, he does not try to project an attractive physical image; He appreciates physical attractiveness, but tries to reduce/hide/obscure his own, and doesn't like seeing other people flaunt it. Not because he disapproves, but because it really worries him. I think, to some extent, enhancing or just playing up one's physical attractiveness feels dishonest as well as dangerous to him. Probably because projecting an attractive image seems to include an offer, or a willingness, that to/for him, isn't real, and because, like a glamor, it obscures part of the truth about oneself.
Dunno, but I do think it's important to separate his opinions on appearance from his opinions on the people themselves.