SHIP: Long Post Re: R/H Yule Ball and JKR

[cassandraclaire at mail.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 13833

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., firoza10 at y... wrote:
>
F: Perhaps I missed something? If Ron's feelings are quite clear in 
GoF,  how is that 'subtext'?

It's not. I think you did miss something, or simply misunderstood
me. The subtext arguments have nothing to do with Ron's feelings,
they have to do with Hermione's.  


F: So how can R/H-er's and myself included have
> interpreted the subtext to conlude that Ron likes Hermione and
> Hermione likes Ron if 'Ron's feelings are quite clear in GoF'? I
> believe that you misunderstood me :-) What I was saying is that IMO
> there is more evidence for a 'subtext' meaning between Ron and
> Hermione than there is for H/H, since I see the R/H interactions in
> GoF as subtle and implied, NOT 'clear' just as H/H fans see a 
subtext meaning. If Ron's feelings were as clear as you claim, then 
there really wouldn't be the 'Yule Ball' debate of late <g>.

Everything is open to debate here, that's the point of the message 
board. And the Yule Ball debate has to do with Hermione's
feelings, not Ron's. 
I'd say the majority of people would say that Ron's feelings for 
Hermione are clear in GoF; even the most die-hard H/H of us (*winks 
at Sue, Penny, Ebony, Carole, Heidi, Lori, etc.*) agree that Ron's 
actions in GoF suggest that he likes Hermione. Possibly not everyone 
agrees with this: there are the people who suggest that Harry
and Ron like each other due to the infamous "ankles scene" in GoF. 
You are never going to get unanimity on any point on a message board 
like this one; I was referencing the observation of the wide 
majority, which is that Ron Likes Hermione.


F: "Thank you for clarifying that FITD has
> nothing to do with 'subtext'."

*looks puzzled* I never mentioned the FITD theory in my post. And I 
never said it has nothing to do with subtext. The Ron segment of it 
has nothing to do with subtext; the Hermione segment has everything 
to do with subtext.

>
F: What I was trying to say was that if FITD means that Hermione 
likes  Harry, then for H/H to happen Harry will eventually have to 
like Hermione, right? Since I don't think Harry will like Hermione 
back, FITD makes no sense to me, that's all, even if it makes sense 
to H/H fans :-)

So it's just a sort of subjective feeling that Harry will never like
Hermione, then? Ah. I thought it had some basis in the text. <g> 


F: <vbg>? As for Hermione glaring at
> Ron being interpreted as a sign of deep affection by R/H ers, the
> ACTION of the glare can be intrepreted as indicating that Ron gets
> under Hermione's skin, so yes, in essence the 'glare' can be thought
> of a sign of deep affection <vbg>.

Okay. If that's your interpretation. She glares at Draco a lot, too. 
And smacks him. He obviously gets under her skin. *g* I like where 
THIS train of argument is going.


F:  Since you do not consider what JKR says in a chat as 'canon', 
that is  fine, but my post was meant to just 'clarify' MY stance on 
why I believe JKR is headed towards R/H."

You didn't say it was clarifying your stance. You said it was 
clarifying her statement.

F: I would never dream of claiming to 'clarify' something for JKR 
either.

*cough.* F: "Please do not launch forth an all out attack on me for 
clarifying JKR's statement." That's what you said.
 
>
F: She (JKR) said Harry and Hermione will not date in Book IV and by 
golly they didn't did they and yes, H/H and R/H have been platonic 
from Books 1-3. So, so far JKR has followed canon :-)

Um, yes she's followed canon. She wrote the canon. It's a bit of a 
tautology to say she's followed it. I am bewildered as to what this 
means.
>

"I was just following my 'faulty reasoning' :-) And, ummm, did you 
not just say that H/H fans interpret Hermione as having feelings for
 Harry, and does not 'having feelings' hopefully lead to love?

Hopefully according to whom? I don't hope that Harry's having 
feelings for Cho will lead to love; that Viktor's feelings for 
Hermione will lead to love. Having feelings and being in love are 
not, obviously, the same. Having feelings does not
always lead to love; otherwise there would be far fewer unhappy 
romances. Also, I think Hermione's too young for In Love.

F: "And I am not assuming 'that interpretatins put on what JKR said in
> chat are gospel truth'. What I AM saying is that what JKR has said 
in  chats is helpful IN MY OPINION, in helping ME interpret the HP 
books, that is all :-)

No, that's not what you said. Maybe it's what you meant, but these 
are two different things. 
You said: "Going back to the Feb. 3, 2000 chat, since it is apparent 
that there is 'something going on between' Ron AND Hermione as of 
Book IV, and
Harry and Hermione are very platonic as of Book IV, common sense
indicates that the only one left is Ginny (since Cedric's death rules
out Cho, and JKR has said that Ginny will play more of a role in Book
V <g>). That is unless anyone thinks that Hermione can be in love
with TWO people at the same time or that JKR, the creator of all
things HP who made these statements, is shall we say, less than
truthful <g>?"

It sounds like you are saying that JKR would not be truthful if Harry 
and Hermione or Draco and Hermione or Harry and Seamus got together 
because at one point she said that there 'was something going on 
between Ron and Hermione' and that Ginny would play a bigger role in 
Book 5. I simple didn't see how that would make her untruthful. I 
still don't.

Also, just because something is your opinion, does not mean we cannot 
or should not disagree with it. If you state your opinion, you should 
expect to have to defend that opinion. Especially on a message board 
like this one, where a wide variety of views are represented.

F: I am sorry if my post offends you <vbg> since you 'just can't read 
any further."

Your previous post didn't offend me, I simply ran out of time and 
energy. Around here we like a lively debate, and I speak for all
my H/H shipmates when I say that, I believe. As Ebony said "This
is 
why we don't cluster and only talk to one another all the time in 
places where disparate PoVs are not encouraged." <lol> Couldn't
agree 
more. Hugs to you, Eb.

Cassie