SHIP: Author intent (was Ron and Hermione do TOO banter!)

[David <dfrankiswork@netscape.net>]

No: HPFGUIDX 50365

Ebony wrote:

> I am rather surprised that the text itself is so very 
> ambiguous... a flaw that I expect will be corrected in OotP.

and later:

> And if JKR intends Hermione to end up with Ron, I want OotP to 
> address many if not all of the points I raised in my essay.  Ron's 
> got great moments, I agree, but the disquiet that some of us feel 
> when it comes to him needs to be addressed.
> 
> However, I doubt that she will address the issues that I brought 
up.  
> I'm no fool; ever since reading GoF I've predicted that Ron and 
> Hermione will date in future books.  If I were a betting woman, my 
> money would be on R/H... 

I concede the first quote above is a little out of context.

I think though Ebony glancingly raises a point that doesn't get a 
lot of attention in the shipping discussion I have seen here.  That 
is that there may be a deliberate ambiguity in the text, such that 
it is consistent both with H/H and H/R.

There are two broad possibilities here, IMO (I am not discussing 
here the possibility that there is only one pairing intended and the 
other is a disastrous accident caused by clumsy writing and/or 
reading.):

1) that one shipping position is misdirection and the 
other 'reality'.  In this case it would almost certainly be R/H that 
is the misdirection and H/H (or some no-ship or even FITD) that is 
what will transpire.  This possibility is broadly in line with other 
plot aspects of the series, e.g. Snape-as-villain in PS, Percy and 
Bagman in COS and GOF.

2) that the situation is more symmetric and that both H/H and R/H 
are being kept open as future possibilities until JKR (and Hermione) 
eventually plumps for one of them, or openly refuses both pro tem.

On the first possibility we would be given enough information in 
future books to 'decode' the current books to say what 'really' 
happened, e.g. we would be told why Hermione blushed at a certain 
point, or what her problem is with Fleur.

On the second, we would eventually get insight of a moment of real 
uncertainty over both boys for Hermione, thus both endorsing and 
relativising aspects of both the R/H and the H/H interpretations of 
the former books.

I have trouble with both readings.  The first because once I know, 
for example, that Quirrell is the villain, all the previous Snape 
passages 'click' and I have no desire to go back to any other 
interpretation.  Seeing the H/H interpretation of various passages 
in GOF does not have the same effect on me: I recognise much of 
their force but it doesn't leave me with that sense of having 
penetrated JKR's misdirection with R/H.  I stress that is a personal 
reaction: I make no claim to suggest that others should feel the 
same.  Possibly JKR's imprimatur on H/H in OOP would make me feel 
differently.

On the other hand, the second reading introduces a degree of 
uncertainty that strikes me as untypical of the HP series.  Yes, 
mystery and deception, authorial and by characters, abound, but 
underlying it all JKR maintains the conviction (IMO) that there *is* 
a reality that can ultimately be known.  IMO it is for this reason 
that we get so invested in our interpretations: we buy into the 
illusion and so suffer anxiety and discomfort when our 
interpretations are seriously challenged, akin to that we feel when 
our real world perceptions are challenged.  The second reading does 
not *contradict* this, but it stresses ambiguity resolved by choice, 
rather than ambiguity resolved by revelation, which I see as more 
typical in the Potterverse.  But then again, choice is an important 
theme, so I'm sure JKR could weave it in with her usual aplomb.  (It 
will be interesting to see how and if Lupin's undoubted ambiguity is 
resolved.)

On the specific point Ebony raises above,

> However, I doubt that she will address the issues that I brought 
up,

I have rather more confidence than Ebony.  I think if R/H is to 
happen *within the series* then the damage Ron has done to his cause 
would have to be fairly explicitly repaired.

David