Too many concepts, not enough books?

[hickengruendler]

No: HPFGUIDX 86172

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adollarandfiftycent" 
<adollarandfiftycent at h...> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Because I'm still pretty new, I was reading through the Lexicon (an
> amazing piece of work).  I couldn't believe how many characters,
> magical devices and spells there are in the Potter world.  I 
couldn't
> figure out a way to count the number of characters (does anyone
> know?), but I don't see how even the major characters could possibly
> be developed in just the two remaining books.
> 
> Maybe it is a matter of personal preference, but I would think that
> good literature doesn't introduce a character unless that character
> will have a purpose and will be developed.  I am starting to think
> Rowling may be forgetting that principle, if it is a principle.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> Fifty

Hickengruendler:

That isn't true for the Harry Potter books. There are many 
characters, who don't need any development, especially the random 
Hogwarts students, and with that I mean everybody except the sextet 
from the DoM, the other Weasley children (no longer at Hogwarts) and 
Draco Malfoy. They just add to the flair. It's like the people you 
met at school, but never really get to know them. It would be 
unrealistic, if there weren't such characters. The same is true for 
every staff member except Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, Snape, 
Trelawney and the DaDA teachers (and maybe Filch, depending what part 
he will play). The other characters are just there, because they 
belong to the school setting, but they aren't important. Random Death 
Eaters and Order members are also unimportant. They are just named, 
so that we know that there are more characters involved in this war, 
than Harry and his closest friends. But there is no need to develop 
them. Many other characters from the Lexicon are just mentioned in 
the books, like Regulus Black.
 
Hickengruendler