er...or, I could come back another time...

[Talisman]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
 >It will be difficult to limit it to posts
>defining themselves as subversive, though. Authors who believe their
>interpretations are a solution to a mystery don't consider their
>reading subversive! And why should they? It could be correct.

Hey, Jen:
That's just it.  I don't go for Redeemed!Draco, myself, but I KNOW 
Guilty!Dumbledore is the ultimate perceptive reading of the text. 
<ese!g>

Someday, the rest of the world will come to know it, too. (sigh)

Let every theory stand on it's own merits, as understood by each 
reader.  Where is the harm in that?

I do believe there are demonstrably wrong theories. But, the way to 
deal with them is to *demonstrate* that they are wrong.

When the basic cataloguing is done--and the series is over--an index 
could be provided to link theories and debunking analyses, if it's 
helpful. Hey, have the theorists/debunkers code their own work into 
it--to the extent they are still around..    

Alternatively, perhaps Kneasy would volunteer to inhabit your 
category.  I believe he's been known to scribble "I'm subversive. 
Try me." on his Meet`n Greet name tag.

But then, that's probably something else, altogether.

Talisman, who doesn't think we should presume to tell future 
readers/researches what the "allowable limits of reader 
interpretation are," at all, and certainly not before we've read the 
ending.