Re: STAGE TWO – the subject categories

[a_reader2003]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Shipping posts make my eyes cross, too.  We will have to sort them,
> though, because people are going to look for them and we do want to 
be complete.  I think we could get away with banishing them to their 
own category, because as far as I can tell they don't analyse either 
the text or the characters the way other posts do.  Instead, they 
seem to have a logic all their own.

Carolyn:
Oh good, we all think the same on this stuff ! How about banishing 
them as you suggest to their own section, but re-fixing the titles of 
each post to make clear who is supposed to be shipping with whom. Eg 
R/H, H/H etc ? Then people can follow their favourites.

However, I can see one or two problemettes in doing this. Quite a few 
of the bigger theories are essentially about relationships, eg 
various adults with the mysterious Florence, Snape with Lily etc. 
There are also some more amusing posts about darker relationships, eg 
Harry and Bella. Do we banish all this to the SHIP bin ? I don't 
think we should.


> TBAY does not belong with SHIPs and FILKs, IMO.  TBAY is real 
analysis of plot and character, much as anyone may or may not like 
the style. Besides, many threads weave into and out of TBAY as 
different people join the discussion.  I think they will have to be 
sorted into textual analysis and character analysis, etc., as they 
fit.  Or edited or rejected, of course, as appropriate.

Carolyn:
Yes, I agree. Lets all contemplate MAGIC DISHWASHER for a moment in 
horrified silence, as possibly the worst case we will have to deal 
with...if we can think of a way forward on that, the rest will be a 
cinch.

> 
> FILKs, now, I think we can leave out entirely.  I can't remember any
> that have ever generated a canon discussion thread.  CMC 
(Coriolanus) already sorts them and publishes them on his own 
website.  True, his are from other sources besides HPfGU, but for us 
to deal with ours seems like it would just duplicate his efforts.  We 
could just note a link to his site in our final product.

Carolyn: 
Yes, this might a good solution. People got very protective of them 
on the Feedback site recently so I don't want to upset everyone 
again, but the thought of having to read them all for classification 
purposes haunts me.. Perhaps people could search our database just 
by 'FILK' and pull them all out that way if they really wanted to ?


> 
> I'd have it:
> 
> 1. Textual Analysis
> 2. Characters: Beasts, Beings and Spirits
> 3. SHIPs
> 4. Sources and Influences
> 5. The Wizarding World
> 6. Predictions
> 
> Anne

Carolyn:

I don't mind putting Beasts, Beings & Spirits in with the characters; 
it makes sense to me, especially Barry's point about animagitis.

SHIPs .. needs more thought, see above !

Hopefully you've been able to open the subject file now Anne, so you 
may agree that 'Textual analysis' and 'sources and influences' might 
be best kept together ??