Let It Be Known in the END, BIC LIGHTER continues

[lunalovegoodrules]

No: HPFGUIDX 78496

Let me, as the the theorist of BIC LIGHTER and ANOTHER HARRY, point 
out that, in my presentation "eons ago" regarding the boy in the 
closet, that I never stated, or implied, that Rowling would ever 
say "and he woke up and it was all a dream." That is clearly a 
misreading of the theory. 

See message 43358 for the beginning of the theory I presented.

This is a reading of Rowling, not a "guess" at the end of the series. 
It IS the series, from the start, right now, and in the future, in a 
manner of speaking. What originally lead me to this reading was the 
peculiar, particular and problematic role that knowledge plays in 
Rowling. This theory has been developed, in more recent, post-OOP 
posts, to include the idea of liberation, not through some alchemical 
manipulation, but through the practice of a clear ethical 
imperative, "self-sacrific", as one recent poster has it, though I 
wouldn't call it that. Just as Wang Wei, on his way home from 
shopping, saw the tanks at Tienamen Square and stood in front of 
them, so Harry, for example, in the very centre of the series, in the 
centre of the middle book, in the centre of the Triwizard, decides to 
save the other "most valuable" people in the lake, not because of 
some moral reasoning, nor philosophical premise, but because 
it's "what needs to be done", in Harry's eyes.

The movie Whale Rider is another good example of this ethical 
imperative at work. But the greatest magic there is not talking to 
whales, but that the society honors such behaviour as Paikea 
performs. Astounding! Generally, it is unappreciated, or even seen as 
dangerous, or, in Harry's case, as "thick."

Now that Harry ostensibly knows the prophecy, and Dumbledore has 
ostensibly come clean, rather more dirtily than the simplest reading 
could have imagined, has this reading changed? Has the problem of 
knowledge been addressed? Has it been altered?

The greatest addition to the theory is, in my estimation, the 
introduction of Luna. Partly, perhaps, she is a creation aimed at the 
so-called new age, but she is also, I take Rowling at her word here, 
the anti-Hermione. She relates directly to the Harry that has so 
rarely appeared in the series, the purely imaginary, outside the 
books Harry, third Harry, as I call him, liberated Harry. In OOP, for 
instance, Harry's contact with her, at the end, supplies us with the 
only real moment of openess, of opening. The door opens a crack. 
Strangely, in that other world, the Witchwizard world, this flakey 
kid Luna looks right at us, as if she can see us. Her gaze is purely 
of this world! How is this possible? Yet, it is so.

Luna has been introduced because, somehow, she is essential to the 
liberation of the boy in the closet - and remember, this closet may 
be an actual closet, it may be spiritual, it may be emotional, it may 
be intellectual, but the boy is definitely in it.

My guess, if I have to have one, is that the boy will be liberated 
from this closet almost without our knowing it, somehow almost a side 
effect of the series resolution. But the theory doesn't require any 
ending at all. The reading exists from page one of book one. It is a 
complete misreading of my theory to even connect it with 
some "ending".

dan