Are The Schoolbooks Canon?

[marinafrants]

No: HPFGUIDX 38958

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., heidi tandy <heidit at n...> wrote:

> I am not sure, Abigail, why you consider it sloppy
> writing to have a number of files and notes and
> backstory things put together, and which JKR uses in
> writing the books, but the details of which we may not
> know. I think it's actually a sign of a well-organized
> mind, and hopefully a good Flint-preventor. What do
> you think is sloppy about having the "research
> material" and the backstories, and then publishing a
> version of some of them?
> 

I'm not Abigail, but I'll tackle the question, because my views on the
matter seem to be similar to hers. :-)

Having notes on backstory and research notes certainly is not sloppy
writing.  Neither is publishing such notes in supplemental material. 
But using this material as the basis for a major plot point in the
novels *without providing the necessary information in the novels
themselves* would be very sloppy indeed.  So if, say, the death cry of
a Jobberknoll provides an important plot revelation in a future novel,
I would expect to see an explanation of the Jobberknoll's nature
somewhere in that novel, or in one of the previous novels.  To omit
the explanation because it's already been given in FB would be sloppy
writing, IMO.  It should be possible for an attentive reader to
understand all the major events in the novels without having to read
anything besides the novels themselves.

Not that I would ever expect to see such sloppiness in the HP books,
because JKR has always taken care to supply necessary explanations
within the novels.  Thus in CoS, we learn about the nature of phoenix
tears long before Fawkes heals Harry in the Chamber.  We learn about
Polyjuice loooong before Crouch Jr. uses it to impersonate Moody.  We
learn about Priori Incantatem before Harry and Voldemort have their
duel.  Based on her past record, I would expect JKR to continue in the
same manner.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com