FF: Speculation - a matter of perspective; Perspective in the Potterverse

[serenadust]

No: HPFGUIDX 38980

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Penny Linsenmayer <pennylin at s...> wrote:
> Hi all --
> 
> Jo Serenadust, commenting on Heidi's theory of a Draco/Hermione 
romance possibility, said:
> 
> <<<<<I just don't see how you were able to do this without 
> ignoring 4 volumes of careful character development by JKR.  I 
guess 
> I'm just too literal-minded a reader to manage this leap.>>>>>>>
> 
> Hmmm.... so is this another case of "There's one way, and only one 
way, to interpret any given character in a work of literature?" 

No, not at all!  I just thought that we were supposed to try to 
embrace the point of view of the author, as we are able to discern 
it.  Some things JKR writes are more clear than others.  I 
personally find her depiction of the relationship between Malfoy and 
Hermione pretty clear.

Penny continued:
 We've had this debate before, and I believe it may predate your 
joining the group, Jo.  Rather than re-hash everything that was said 
in the latest iteration of the debate, I thought I'd just give a 
link to a few of the messages that really addressed these issues 
before, as they were quite lengthy (this was April 2001):
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/16370
> (Lexicon Steve arguing that fanfic changes a reader's perception 
of JKR's characters and that fanfic writers are circumventing JKR's 
authorial intent (and therefore fanfic readers are being exposed to 
interpretative views that don't square with JKR's intentions))
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/16381
> (my response, which, in short, counters that authorial intent is 
not fully discernible unless JKR unequivocally confirms her intent 
in a chat or interview or by making her notes public)
> 

I do thank you Penny, for directing me to Steve's post.  He does a 
much better job than I do in presenting the reasons for my 
reservations about fanfic.  I'm thrilled to be in such distinguished 
company!


Penny said:
> 
> <<<< She's an author and doubtless would consider that there is 
more than one interpretation for everything in her books; there's 
even more than one path that she could have chosen
> (having written myself, I can say that you sometimes weigh 
multiple valid courses of action but eventually must choose only 
one). Anyway, I'm completely opposed to the notion that there is 
only one JKR interpretation of these characters and books and I'm 
especially opposed to the notion that this one interpretation is 
discernible by people other than JKR herself.>>>>
> 
> Authorial intent is tricky business IMHO.   To say that Heidi 
is "ignoring" JKR's character development is basically equivalent to 
saying "Heidi, your interpretation is wrong and mine is correct."  
The whole point of this discussion list is further *discussion.*  
And, I might add, virtually everything we discuss here is 
speculation in some form.  Except for the rare occasion when someone 
needs reminding of an indisputable purely factual matter (i.e. Harry 
and Dudley are first cousins), all we've done for the last 2.5 yrs 
is speculate.  Whether the speculation takes the form of a straight 
narrative argument weighing the pros & cons of the proposition that 
Snape is a vampire, or is a TBAY post elaborating on the same topic 
or is a fanfic giving a backstory to Snape's vampirehood -- it's all 
speculation.  It just takes various forms.

What can I say?  I find there to be a big difference 
between "discussion" and fanfic. I have no problem with having my 
perceptions of canon challenged by the discussions on this list.  
Fanfic IMO brings a whole new, subversive level of distortion to the 
characters in particular.  They aren't JKR's Harry, Ron, Hermione, 
et al; they *can't* be.  I wouldn't care so much if I hadn't read so 
many posts citing other author's versions of the characters in 
support of the posters perceptions of the canon characters.


> Penny wrote:
> It sounds as though you've had a really terrible experience with 
fanfic and that's too bad.  There are a number of really great fics 
out there -- all ships, all genres (shipless & shipper-oriented).  
It's entirely possible that you could read a dozen or so badly-
written or poorly-plotted fics and completely give up on the 
experience.  Check out our Fanfic FAQ or FictionAlley though if you 
want to give it another whirl & want some recommendations.  

Sadly, I did read several truly putrid fanfics on the sub-literate 
level. I have, however, also read some of the one's that are 
recommended as the good adult-level fics, as well.  I guess I began 
reading them to sort of fill the gap until the next book and with 
the mistaken impression that the authors would be trying to go where 
they really thought JKR would most likely go with her story.  Boy, 
was I surprised.  I finally stopped reading them because I found 
that they ranges from the bizarre to the just plain depressing.  
None of them captured, for me, the essence of the books I craved.  
I'm still a member of some of the groups, and look in from time to 
time but I never post because I'm so clearly out of step with 
everyone else on those lists.

Believe it or not, the first time I read on this list that people 
actually thought that Rowling might put Harry and Hermione together 
romantically, I was slack-jawed in amazement.  I'd never even 
considered the possibility (what a sweet,naive newbie, I was)!  
After reviewing the books, I still find the idea of such a pairing 
frankly unbelievable for a number of reasons I won't go into here.  
However, I'm no longer surprised by it, and enjoy reading the 
reasons people pose to support this idea even if I'm never convinced 
by them.

I'm sorry I took so long to reply to this post. RL has been 
overwhelming lately (in a good way), and will continue to be for the 
next few weeks.  I hope I haven't hurt the feelings of anyone who 
writes/enjoys fanfic.  I have been impressed by the amazing amount 
of effort and obvious talent that goes into the better ones.  It's 
just not for me.

Jo S. 


> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]