More Questions (was Re: The timeline on the DVD *confirms* canon).

[serenadust]

No: HPFGUIDX 55539

Eileen wrote:


> > I am not at all comfortable with the idea of taking
> > information from merchandise, even if approved. There
> > is plenty of precedent for author-approved merchandise
> > which is completely wrong. 
> > 
> > I don't care much about the controversy myself, but I
> > am not about to take direction from a DVD. The books
> > are my canon and I'll take interviews into
> > consideration. 


Ebony replied:

> Hermione's birthday *has been* confirmed in the books already, in 
> PoA.  Dumbledore calls Hermione and Harry "two thirteen year old 
> wizards".  But many fandomers (esp. those educated under the UK 
> system) protested because in England, *no one* born on September 
19 
> is *ever* admitted to school early.  Ever.  No exceptions, etc.  
(It 
> should also be noted that Hogwarts is from every indication in 
> Scotland, not England, and that JKR taught in Portugal, whose cut-
off 
> date and admissions process is not generally discussed.)

But the point is that Hermione *is* presumed to be in the English 
school system prior to her admission to Hogwarts, so JKRs Portugese 
experience and Hogwarts location aren't really relevant to 
understanding how to reconcile Hermione's admission to Hogwarts as a 
10 year old.

I've never really cared one way or another about Hermione's age, 
since I don't believe it makes any difference concerning her 
characterization or role in the books.  However, now that this issue 
has come out with the DVD's timeline, I'm curious about the 
explanation for this apparent disconnect.  There are two 
possibilities I can see. 

 First, Hermione (because of her extreme precocity) is an extremely 
rare exception to the UK practice of not admitting children to 
school unless they are of age on Sept. 1.  If she has always been 
the youngest in her class, then I suppose it would be consistent for 
Hogwarts to admit her at the age of ten because she would have 
received the same number of years of schooling as her muggle-
born/educated peers.  However, the UK members of the list have been 
fairly consistent in declaring that children who are underage are 
never admitted early, so I have trouble buying this.

Possibility two is that Hermione has had one less year of muggle-
education than Harry and other muggle-raised children at Hogwarts, 
but because she's so extremely brilliant, McGonagall went ahead and 
sent her letter ahead of schedule.  There's nothing in canon to 
support this, but there's nothing there to rule it out either.  
Hermione would have to have been aware of the letter and have gone 
to get her school books well in advance of Sept 1 in order to 
have "learned all our course books by heart, of course", tried out 
several successful spells, and to have heard that "...it's the very 
best school of witchcraft there is."
It appears that Harry received his first letter approximately 1 week 
before his 11th birthday which would put it at about July 23/24.  
Why would Hermione get her letter so far in advance?

Ebony wrote:
 
> The fandom's most reputable news source, The Leaky Cauldron, 
reported 
> that Warner Home Video confirmed that Rowling *did* approve the 
> timeline.  For me, that's as good as if she had written it herself.

It's not as if JKR hasn't endorsed numerical inconsistencies 
before.  She certainly approved Marcus Flint appearing in POA, even 
though he should have left school the year before (and let's not 
even get into the "Hogwarts student population" issue again).  We've 
established that math/dates are *not* her strong suit.  It's 
possible she hasn't thought this one through completely.

Ebony continued:
 
> And if you're "not about to take direction from a DVD", then let's 
> hope that paper books don't go the way of eight-tracks, eh?  I 
feel 
> that this is just as much canon as some of JKR's more vague 
> interviews.

I can't agree here, since signing off on a timeline someone else 
wrote isn't really in the same category as developing one yourself, 
or making public statements in an interview, vague or otherwise.  
Remember the wand order issue in GoF? The fact that she missed 
something as significant to the plot as that was frankly amazing. 
She's good but she's not infallible.

Ebony wrote:
> This issue might be a minor one, but then again, so are several 
> others that JKR clarified in GoF, the schoolbooks, and now.  The 
care 
> that our author has taken to clarify even this minute detail shows 
> the care she puts into everything in her universe.

I agree that she tries very hard to keep her details straight, but 
again, she does seem to have her greatest difficulties with numbers 
and dates.  If she was trying to finish OOP, prepare for a new baby, 
and help with the DVD, I can easily see how something as trivial as 
this could fall through the cracks.
 
Ebony:
> The proceedings from the "What is canon?" panel that Barb and 
others 
> will be sitting on at Nimbus - 2003 will be especially interesting.
> 
> So yes, I appreciate the clarification, and I thank JKR for 
hearing 
> her fans.

As I said above, I don't really understand why this matters one way 
or another, but now that the DVD timeline has come out and been 
described as approved by JKR, I'm curious to hear the explanation 
for Hermione's birthdate.  It could be that she has thought all this 
out in great detail as you say, in which case there has to be a 
reason for the inconsistency.  If that's the case, I really hope 
that someone asks her about it in an interview, because now I really 
want to know.

Jo Serenadust, who thinks this sounds like a bit of a Flint