Re: QUESTIONS ON CATEGORY 2 – CHARACTER ANALYSIS

[corinthum]

> Related to the theory acronym question is what do we do about posts 
> which have a consistent theme, but are not specifically linked to 
> named theories? Would it be useful to have sub-headings under each 
> character, in order to be able to follow streams of ideas? Eg 
should 
> we move 1.2.2 (Dumbledore's agenda) to a sub-category under 
> Dumbledore? Should we have a box under Snape called `Is he a spy?', 
> and another one to track his many hypothetical romantic 
> entanglements? Would it be too difficult at this stage to 
anticipate 
> the many convoluted propositions that have been put forward about 
> each character? If we did this, would it cause mega-confusion with 
> the text themes listed in Category 1?

I don't think there's any need to move categories to their related 
people.  If I were to come across a post discussing Dumbledore's 
agenda, I'd check both the theme here and Dumbledore in the 
characters section.  


> Also, I have a pretty complete list of all the characters in the 
> books – I could expand the names on this list exponentially if 
anyone 
> thought it was useful. 

No, I think that would just make the cataloguing process more 
difficult, without much benefit since minor characters are very 
rarely discussed in and of themselves (not related to one of the 
other categories).


> (2.14) RelationSHIPPING
> Are there enough options here? I have been a bit cavalier and have 
> been putting some non-Trio speculation (eg Harry/Cho) under 2.14.7 
> (Trio ships), although also under Cho (or whoever), if it blossomed 
> into a wider analysis of character and motivations.

I haven't actually coded any ships yet, but I would consider a "Trio 
Ship" to be one that included at least one of the trio.

-Kelly