fanfic/speculation - more bletherings

[blpurdom]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "gwendolyngrace" <lee_hillman at u...> 
wrote:
Dave wrote:
> > I understand the main difference to be precisely the narrative
> > context.  I did try to work out a fanfic in my mind, and it fell 
> > over because, while the *idea* was competent enough, I was 
> > unable to develop a *sequence of events* to hang it on.  
> > Obviously, if you can make up sequences of events, you have a 
> > very powerful mechanism for testing canon theories, so to that 
> > extent, fanfic is superior to theoretical speculation.

I do think it is true that I began to write fanfic as a way of 
fleshing out some of my theories of what could eventually happen in 
canon.  Plus,  I read other fanfics, and while I enjoyed them, I 
didn't see any of the stories going where I imagined things going, 
and so I began to sort it all out on paper, eventually writing a 
monster of a fic (650 pages in my word processor).
 
> Dave again:
> > I think the fundamental device is to keep 'fact' separate
> > from 'theory' in your mind.  None of us is very good at this, 
> > because a good theory replaces a large pile of facts so 
> > economically (and a bad one seems to).  So, rather than, say, 
> > deciding that Snape is or is not a vampire, keep all the bits of 
> > canon in mind that bear on the question, and don't decide.  
> > Develop interpretations of conflicting evidence (ie explain away 
> > the garlic if he isn't; explain away the 'non-wizarding part-
> > humans' if he is) and keep them in your mind as interpretations 
> > *while still retaining all the facts*.

I personally think that animal similes are an integral element of 
Rowling's writing style, and shouldn't be taken as more significant 
than that; it's been proposed, for instance, that Molly is a saber-
toothed tiger Animagus because JKR compares her to this animal at 
one point!  I think this is going way overboard; EVERYONE isn't an 
Animagus!  It should be noted, for instance, that even McGonagall 
and Rita Skeeter, when they are in their human forms, do not elicit 
a huge number of animal similes from JKR.  Sirius does sometimes, 
but those were chiefly times when he was spending long periods 
disguised as a dog and one was given the impression that he'd almost 
forgotten how to be human as a result.  The other similes--and I 
think references to Snape's resemblance to a bat are included here--
are chiefly to paint vivid word pictures, and sometimes to induce us 
to compare the person to the animal in question.

The way I dealt with the Snape theories was by giving Snape 
porphyria, a disease which was mistaken for vampirism many times 
over the centuries.  I depicted a young Snape in school with other 
students--including Sirius Black--who teased him mercilessly about 
being a vampire because of this disease.  In Snape's case, I don't 
believe JKR will either reveal Snape to be a vampire, bat Animagus 
or person with porphyria; I was merely tweaking the fandom theory 
that he was a vampire, a theory based on one of JKR's chief literary 
devices.  So while many of us are speculating on what will develop 
eventually in canon, there's also a certain amount of puckishness 
going on in fanfiction.  (Think of how many cameos Simon Branford 
has, for instance.<g>)  We're doing this to have fun, after all. 
Plus, there are also things we'd LIKE to happen in canon, and 
perhaps knowing that we will never see these things (from JKR's 
mouth, for instance), we put them in fanfics.  While we all love the 
books, I think everyone can think of at least one thing they would 
do differently, and in fanfic we have that freedom.

> This is very interesting. But do you think non-fanfic writers are 
> any better at this than fanfic writers?
> 
> In one sense, I could argue that the person who doesn't write is
> better, because the writer must "commit" to a theory in order to 
> use it as the structural basis for the story framework.

But one is only committed for the duration of that piece of work.  I 
personally hold many conflicting theories of what will happen; I 
just haven't had time yet to explore all of them through fanfic.

> But then, OTOH, there are those non-fanfic folks who believe just 
> as vehemently in their theories and reject others. They have still
> "committed" to their version of the facts, without ever having put
> themselves through the process of writing it. So are they more or 
> less likely to acknowledge different but equal possibilities?

I believe that in addition to putting the word "committed" in quotes 
you should have done the same with "facts."  Until JKR writes it and 
makes it available for the general public, it ain't canon.  (And 
even then, there are Flints, like the wand-order mistake.)  But I 
don't believe that non-fanfic writers have a monopoly on rigidity; 
I've seen this come from both sides of the fence.

> Dave:
> > I think I'm basically with you on this - that speculation suffers
> > from the supposed disadvantages of fanfic in terms of diverging 
> > from, and 'polluting' canon.  There is no such point.  With the 
> > very little fanfic that I've read, I found no difficulty in 
> > seeing the characters as essentially different from canon - 
> > though stylistic differences in writing may have helped here.  
> > Thus POU Hermione does not affect my understanding of canon 
> > Hermione.  In the same way, I can read somebody's speculation 
> > and keep my own perception intact - unless I choose to change it.

Some people seem to be very hostile to fanfic and do indeed think 
it "pollutes" canon.  No one forces them to read it.  I usually find 
myself put off by fics that contain bad grammar and spelling more 
than "bad" content, although if the fic includes things like people 
Apparating on the grounds of Hogwarts, no matter how well-written it 
is, I'll probably stop reading it.  And I've seen one or two things 
lately where the writer obviously didn't read the books, only saw 
the film (the writer didn't know how many older brothers Ron had and 
made up a name for one).  When so much information is available in 
the books, a clear failure to do research throws a big old wet 
blanket on the fic for me.  

> Yes! That's kind of what I think too. Personally, I think I've 
> done a good job (and I'm assured in most cases that this is true) 
> of staying "in character" with my HP fanfic, keeping even Draco 
> from becoming a misunderstood, nice but sarcastic kid who really 
> wants to be good, and just isn't allowed the chance. ;^) And yet, 
> there were still actions I chose or needed the HP characters to 
> take, to further my own plot agenda, and while I believe it was in 
> character to do so, I received reviews saying it wasn't.

Sounds similar to my Draco.  I'll have to take a look at it.  (Mine 
is still pretty snide, though.)  Readers do bring a lot of baggage 
to a fic, and I've had people say they both love and hate my version 
of Ron (usually based on whether they love or hate him in canon).  
There's no agreement on this, but then, there's no agreement on 
canon Ron, either.
 
> Mahoney just sent me a private email where she very astutely 
> reflected that she sees straight speculation and fanfic writing as 
> the same thing, but merely presented in a different format.

That sounds about right.  I think most of us are positing possible 
scenarios and trying to see whether they're plausible by doing what 
Dave talked about and trying to find the *sequence of events* that 
would lead to the speculated event that was the impetus for writing 
the fic.  
 
> I think if that definition is true, than to some extent, aren't all
> listies participating in analysis also contributing to fanfic?

Oh, definitely.  I never would have thought of Snape having 
porphyria if it weren't for the HPfGU list!

--Barb

Get Psyched Out!
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych
http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb