[HPforGrownups] A Gleam in the Darkness, FANFIC, SHIP

Tue Dec 11 21:54:40 UTC 2001

No: HPFGUIDX 31322

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lea [mailto:spaceyoo at 012.net.il] 

> I am a little sceptical about the theory we are being 
> presented with in the books, in which Harry survives because 
> of his mothers love and sacrifice. We are pretty sure that no 
> one else has ever survived the AK curse, let alone one cast 
> by Voldie himself, but does it make sense that Harry was the 
> only person in the wizarding world who had someone to die for 
> him? No one else? No best friends, siblings, lovers or 
> parents ready to die for what they consider to be the centre 
> of their universe? Could it be? It could be explained either 
> by the fact that Voldie didn't kill that many people - not 
> thousands or hundreds in any case, thus my statistics lose 
> their relevancy. Or maybe the sacrifice was only a small part 
> of something much more powerful, which in the meanwhile 
> serves as a set - up.

Lea, I think you're on the right track here - this is a subject that
Listmum Penny and I have discussed on & off list on many occasions, and
(to note a relationship to another thread, have discourced on in fanfic
writing!). We are told by Fake!Moody that Harry is the only person to
have survived the curse, no matter who has performed it. Yet we're also
told by him that the power of the wizard makes an impact - in other
words, the fledgling 4th years couldn't even give someone a nosebleed.
These statements seem to be internally inconsistent, but it's possible
that Crouch truly meant that Harry is the one person who survived the
curse, full on. And it's also possible that Voldemort has already told
him a bit more than the average Dark wizard knows about what happened at
Godric's Hollow that Halloween night - possibly even more than Harry
himself knows. 

But on the issue of Someone Dying For Another, I agree with you that
it's highly unlikely that nobody ever tried that before. 

Cindy wrote:

> But I still think there's a pretty big difference between theories on 
> the board and theories in fanfic.  When one of us spins a theory on 
> the board, we are basing it on canon.  Listies blow the whistle if 
> you stray from canon, or even embellish canon ("Where does it say 
> *that?", they will howl.)  
They do that regarding fanfic as well. When I said that Professor
Sinistra was head of Ravenclaw, I got at least 10 emails pointing me to
the quote from JKR that says otherwise; in a recent chapter of Draco
Veritas, which I beta read, my mishearing that Jim Dale said that Great
Uncle Algie "bought" Trevor for Neville, rather than "got" Trevor for
Neville, has consumed another yahoogroup for over a day.  

> There is a reasonably bright line, IMHO, 
> between what is a creative theory based on canon and what is just 
> someone making something up (e.g. is Harry really Tom Riddle, Sr. 
> reincarnated).  
Yes, and these kinds of bright lines (although I admit I've never seen
that one in a fanfic before) allow the reader to easily separate fanfic
(aka fanon) from canon. 

> 
> But fanfic seems to go one step further -- the writer is allowed to 
> start with canon, but then change *huge* things.  
What sort of huge things? Most of the fanfic I see, and the only fanfic
we put on FictionAlley (unless it says AU) adheres to things from canon
and *grows* from there. It doesn't change, or at least, it tries not to
change, what exists in canon already, but rather extrapolates from what
we *know* in an organic experience. And when it doesn't, I generally
will not read it. Then again, if someone wants to write a fic set at
Hogwarts in the days when Tom Riddle was a schoolboy and wants him to
apparate from the castle, if they put in an explanation, fine by me. 

> It is harder, I 
> think, to evaluate whether this or that character would do this or 
> that in a fanfic because I see it as an extra step removed from 
> canon.  Facts and characters have been added, so how could one even 
> really conclude whether the fanfic is true to canon?  
I don't really understand what you mean by "true to canon" - do you mean
"a natural outgrowth from what we know", or "a reasonable backstory to
explain characterization and plot from canon", or "where the characters
remain in character"? I don't think that on a bright line basis, it's
hard at all to evaluate whether this or that character would do this or
that - especially if the fic is a Harry-perspective story. We know that
he didn't have a snog session with Cho atop the Astronomy Tower in book
4; anything including that would be an AU. We know that he doesn't like
Potions class in the books to date; anything saying otherwise would be
an AU. However, do we know 100% that Ginny hasn't developed a friendship
with Hermione off the pages? Or that she isn't crushing on Neville these
days? Or whether James and Sirius knew each other before Hogwarts? Or
whether Snape knew that Lucius hadn't renounced his Death Eating
actions? They aren't all "true to canon", per se, but they're not untrue
to canon either. 

When I joined HP4GU back in June, 2000, I had never read fanfic - well,
other than Wide Sargasso Sea, which is really fanfic for Jane Eyre - but
people began to point me to various fics that, they said, provided a
different perspective on canon. And that's what *I* see fanfic as - a
different perspective on canon, the same as every (well, every good!)
post here is a perspective on canon. 

Jenny Fron Ravenclaw (about whom I will not mention that M____ lunchbox)
said:
> I see Ron's attraction to Hermione not as a consolation prize, but 
> more realistically; in some ways, Hermione reminds me of Molly 
> Weasley.  She is tough on others (something Ron sometimes needs) and 
> can be quite maternal at times.  Ron, like many boys, may be 
> subconsciously seeking out someone who is like his mother.  Hermione 
> may be looking at Ron as someone who has what she lacks; he is 
> adventurous, funny, not so uptight about following every last rule, 
> etc. 

See, I don't see Hermione as maternal at all, and maybe that's because
I'm a mom now, and I also see Harry as being adventurous, with a
burgeoning dry wit - and of course, he's not uptight about following
every last rule (in fact, neither is Hermione at this point in canon) -
so where Jenny sees these arguments as supoorting R/H, I see them as
SHIP-neutral - in other words, they don't make one *obvious* at the
expense of the other. 

heidi tandy
follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes&
ships - only 7 sickles an ounce
http://www.fictionalley.org

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com