JKR's Titles [was: Why is GoF called "GoF"?]

[Barb]

No: HPFGUIDX 29861

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Susanne Schmid <pigwidgeon37 at y...> wrote:
>   fourgom at a... wrote: 
> >This is something that I wondered about right after I finished 
> >Goblet of Fire.
> 
> >Why is the book called "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire?" The 
> >Goblet of Fire appears in all of ONE chapter, and the role it 
> >plays isn't that big, in the scheme of the book.
> 
> >Is there a hidden meaning I overlooked? Some foreshadowing to one 
> >of the later books? Any suggestions or ideas would be most 
> >welcome.
> 
> I'd like to believe that it's one of the more brilliant choices of 
> title in literary history: Like "The Three Musqueteers", when 
> everybody knows that the story is in reality about the fourth. 
> Something important, but not the *most* important element of the 
> book. 

Excellent point.  It is true that the first book being called 
Philosopher's Stone is a bit of a tip-off, particularly if you are 
NOT reading the American version with the needless and confusing 
name-change; without "philosopher's stone" in our minds, the casual 
mention of Dumbledore and Nicolas Flamel's work in alchemy becomes 
mere background noise.  Anyone who knows anything about alchemy 
knows that alchemists were trying to create/find the philosopher's 
stone.  Since the American book refers to a sorcerer's stone and not 
a philosopher's stone, this alchemy reference was completely lost on 
me.  I know what a philosopher's stone is, for heaven's sake. 
[Insert grumbling about the American publisher here...]

It probably never occurred to JKR that the American publisher would 
balk at the word "philosopher," and so she put the most significant 
magical object in the book in the title, which makes a certain 
amount of sense.  The goblet is also the most significant magical 
object in the fourth book.  In the second book, the most significant 
magical object is the diary, but "Harry Potter and the Enchanted 
Diary" would have been even more of a tip-off than "Philsopher's 
Stone."  So she went with a significant but mysterious place, 
the "Chamber of Secrets."  

There are several possibilities for significant magical objects to 
make it into the title of the third book, but all of them would 
constitute spoilers.  The map is significant, but not significant 
enough.  ("Harry Potter and the Marauder's Map," anyone?  Nah; me 
neither.) The time turner was certainly significant, but since we 
weren't to know about it until late in the book, "Harry Potter and 
the Time Turner" wouldn't work either.  So she went with "Prisoner 
of Azkaban."  This is high appropriate as we find out about Sirius' 
escape fairly early on, and much of the book is focussed on the 
seige-like atmosphere that developments at the school in an effort 
to keep Sirius out.

If "Goblet of Fire" were to be named for a person instead of a 
magical object, I suppose it could have been "Harry Potter and the 
Servant of Voldemort," but it would be unclear whether it referred 
to Moody/Crouch or Wormtail (although it's possible that wouldn't 
matter, and it might even be good for a title to have more than one 
meaning).  Perhaps she could still give a book this title, who 
knows?  I personally like the title of the fourth book very much.

The great thing about "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" is 
that it is in fact so difficult to figure out what it might mean.  I 
think just speculating about the title has occupied the folks on 
this list for weeks.  This is probably her best title yet, and I 
would not be surprised if the other possible titles for future books 
that were "leaked" were merely red herrings.  I just hope we don't 
discover the day before the fifth book is released that in the US 
it's going to be called "Harry Potter and the Congressional Medal of 
Honor."

--Barb