Why Harry Potter cannot be set in 1991-?

[Kia]

No: HPFGUIDX 79289

>Erin wrote:

>I don't believe JKR actually was meaning to date the books 
>when she wrote them, I think she meant them to be more of a 
>timeless story for the ages type thing. The pinning down of the 
>exact dates of everything is something that came about 
>because of the fans. If anything, she erred by writing down the 
>date of Nick's death, allowing us fans to get a foothold to 
>speculate.



I think Rowling wanted to date Harry Potter when she made 1492 
the year of Nick's death. She easily could have avoided giving the 
year and just mentioned the anniversary.

Interestingly enough if 1980 *is* the birthyear of Harry's it means 
that he would have been ten in 1990 - the year Rowling had the 
idea  - and ten is the age Harry's point of view becomes the 
story's point of view.

But HP will be dated by other things, mostly Dudley's electronic 
gadgets, but also other little details which can be found in the 
opening chapters like Frank Bryce coming back from the war etc. 

That all doesn't necessarily scream 1992 or 1997 but in 
twenty-five years there won't be any old men left that came back 
from "the war" and you didn't play Mega-Multilation III on a 
Playstation in the 80's.

So at the end of the day you can't date HP specifically down to a 
year, but it is very much contemporary and therefore it will age as 
"Tom Brown's Schooldays" aged by mentioning that King William 
IV is king even if Hughes didn't give us a specific date.



Kia