Young Adult/Children's Literature

[heiditandy <heidit@netbox.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51230

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Susanne <siskiou at e...> wrote:
> 

> I just read one of her interviews here:
> http://www.ala.org/BookLinks/jkrowling.html
> 
> It's an old one, from July 1999, but I haven't sought out
> many of her interviews before, so it's all new to me :)
> 
> I thought the following was kind of funny, considering what
> we are doing on this list <g>.
>
> ************************************
> JKR:
> Only later can you start analyzing it. But you can
> overanalyze, too. 

Then again, she also says in that same interview that there's a 
level of analyzing that she *expects* from her readers, as shown 
here:

JOM: Do you think children consciously pick up on the levels of 
meaning in the book?
Rowling: Definitely some do, because I've met them. In fact, I met a 
boy this morning who asked me the question I had thought everyone 
would ask me when the book was published, but this was the first 
time it's come up. He said to me, "If Harry's aunt and uncle hate 
him so much, why don't they just throw him out?" Well, that's a very 
shrewd point, and it will only be explained in book five. But, I had 
expected to have to explain that on a daily basis as the book became 
popular. I kept wondering why no one had asked, as I would want to 
know that if I were a reader. So, finally, Dennis in Chicago 
realized that this was a fundamental question that needs answering. 
He's right, and he'll find out in book five.

***********************

(also, I'm now wondering if this is going to hold and show up as a 
subject in book 5!)

If you look at the questions in that interview, it seems quite clear 
that the interviewer was focused on the "writing for children" 
concept/issue/topic, and I think that definitely created a slant in 
some of her answers that isn't necessarily evidenced by other 
interviews, including those I cited yesterday. 

There's another interesting point in that interview where she seems 
to bridge what I think you see as a gap between those interviews and 
the ones where she said she wrote the book she'd want to read, as 
shown here:

<<I write what I think is a child's story—although really I wrote it 
for me, primarily for me. In fact, when I first started writing, I 
think I was thinking too much about the children who would read it. 
So, I thought, okay, just write it for yourself. And that was the 
right decision, because then, as a writer, you can't talk down to 
your audience.>>

This last sentence really goes to the heart of what I was replying 
to yesterday, IMHO, which is the idea that a book "for kids" (to use 
the line from Hudsucker Proxy) is more leading and inherently 
simplistic than a novel for adults. Regardless of whether she's 
writing for kids or adults, she's made it clear that she's not 
talking down to her audience and therefore, a claim that her book 
is "leading" is something that I personally don't see any basis for, 
in anything she's ever said. 

I recommend using The Goat Pen as a resource for interviews, btw - 
it's located here: www.geocities.com/aberforths_goat/goat.htm 


heidi