[HPforGrownups] Re: The timeline on the DVD *confirms* canon.

[Eileen]

No: HPFGUIDX 55827

 --- Ebony <selah_1977 at yahoo.com> wrote: >
> Hermione's birthday *has been* confirmed in the
> books already, in 
> PoA.  Dumbledore calls Hermione and Harry "two
> thirteen year old 
> wizards". 

It strikes me that if you believe this is so, the DVD
timeline can't be terribly important. After all, canon
has confirmed it, no? You don't really believe that
the DVD has settled things. You believe that canon has
settled things.

> 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.

Speaking from an academic point of view, the
provenance is none too great. This is not because the
Leaky Cauldron isn't reputable. We all know it is.
TLC's source however is not so obviously reputable,
imho. Someone at Warner Home Video who ought to know
does not equate complete gospel truth. 

Not that I think it unlikely that JKR *did* approve
the timeline. Only that we have hearsay alone to
confirm this. If anyone cares to dispute this, I'd ask
them first to consider whether they would be allowed
to document this as *fact* in an academic paper. 

> 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? 

Never until the large percentage of the population
(including me) that refuses to read with bookmarks,
and  instinctively find their place in books by touch,
disappears! 

But if in the future, the book was to come to us way
of the DVD, it'd still be a  book, no? In which case,
discussing the extinction of paper books has really
nothing to do with the attending material of the
CTTMNBN.

> I feel 
> that this is just as much canon as some of JKR's
> more vague 
> interviews.

I wouldn't consider either canon. But let it be noted
that we have 100% certainty that the vague interviews
were JKR's. In our hypothetical academic paper, the
interviews could be footnoted without any trouble. 

> 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.

Again, JKR wrote GoF, and she wrote the schoolbooks.
We do not have proof that she wrote the timeline. I
see a huge difference here. 

Furthermore, even were the report to be correct,
which, to tell the truth, I suspect it is...
 
Jo Serenadust wrote of Ebony's acceptance of
 the timeline as canon:
>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. 

To which I can only say Amen. 

Eileen

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca