[HPforGrownups] Descriptions; and what about the other four senses?

[Neil Ward]

No: HPFGUIDX 24912

Frantyck said:

<<I noticed fairly early that her [Rowling's] descriptions are slyly
non-descriptive. She gives what she wants to describe a name, and leaves the
rest up to the reader. The following examples are all from PS/SS.  <snipped
several examples, illustrating the point>

In each case, this is *more or less* all that we ever hear about the
appearance of these characters. What Rowling gives the reader is an
assemblage of discrete physical characteristics; the reader fills in the
gaps, literally.>>

Wonderful analysis, Frantyck, and a very good point, referring back to the
recent thread about the universal appeal of Harry Potter.  I think this
early 'cartooning' of the characters is key to their wide appeal.  There are
gaps to be filled, so the reader fills them in, but, to some extent, the
stereotypes are already imprinted on the subconscious like cattle brands -
Ron the clown, Hermione the swot, Hagrid the gentle henchman, McGonagall the
schoolmarm, Snape the nasty teacher, Vernon the blustering uncle.  This
perhaps sets the scene for some 'surprising' deviations from character,
based mainly on behaviour.

Another, related factor that often has an effect on the reader is the names
of the characters.  We've often discussed this here, but Rowling has a sort
of genius for naming her characters.  More often than not, the hints given
in the names are obvious (Remus Lupin might as well have had a big neon sign
on his head saying "beware of the werewolf"), but she still has the nack of
conveying a great deal in her choices.  I always recall her comment on
"dumbledore" being an obsolete English word to describe a bumblebee, and the
fact that she read it in an old dictionary, somewhere.  I wonder how much of
her subsequent characterisation of Dumbledore was triggered by that perfect,
disused name she found, and how much from her previous plotting for the
character?

<<Second-to-last point: the five senses, used as a tool in description.
Rowling's world is unusually muffled in all except visual terms. <snipped
some details> >>

This raises an interesting point that may associate with the fact that
people with one or more senses dulled or missing may demonstrate
improvements in other senses.  If the input from one sense is particularly
keen, it may heighten the experiencing of the world, but create a view of it
that is distorted.  In the visual domain, this might be likened to getting a
buzz from an Impressionist painting that wouldn't be there in a photograph
of the same subject.

One of my favourite books is "Perfume" by Patrick Sskind.  Briefly, for
those of you who haven't read it, it's about a man born with a very acute
sense of smell, who is driven to seek the ultimate scent.  The descriptive
language of the book hits the reader in the face, and I think that's because
it focuses overwhelmingly on the olfactory sense.  There is a distortion in
that that creates a very unusual, bold experience.

<<That brings me to my last point: Rowling's unadventurous adjectives. Fat,
brown, mouldy, huge, horrible, blank, cold, hot, etc. Rather bland fare.
Conversely, her verbs and nouns are almost unbelievably apposite... Urging,
squinting, swishing, flickering, scrambling, etc.  They give the texts
forward motion, the urgency of action.>>

I'm sure I'll get jumped on for saying this, but JKR is not the most poetic
of writers.  I'm know she is capable of poetic phrasing, but she often
chooses instead the combination of straightforward language you describe.
This is clearly important in the appeal of the books to children, and
suggests to me that JKR intends to be inclusive of younger readers, even if
she isn't writing specifically for them [obligatory get-Penny-off-my-back
disclaimer].   Whatever the formula is, it works.

Neil (back in the UK and glad to be driving on the right side of the road
again: i.e. the left)
________________________________________

Flying Ford Anglia

"The cat's ginger fur was thick and fluffy, but it was definitely
a bit bow-legged and its face looked grumpy and oddly
squashed, as though it had run headlong into a brick wall"
["The Leaky Cauldron", PoA]