The Weasleys Not @ MOM

[Richard]

No: HPFGUIDX 83514

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" <dequardo at w...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" <darkmatter30 at y...> 
> wrote In response to the Where Were the Weasleys thread:
> 
> > In the end, though, we will never know where they were, what they 
> > were doing, or why, unless JKR tells us.  But until she does, 
there 
> > is no reason to suppose a Flint or an inconsistency is to be 
found in 
> > their absense, and ample room is available for relatively 
baseless 
> > speculation.
> > 
> > 
> > Richard
> 
> Me:
> Richard-- the entire point of this list *is* for our own continual 
speculations  
> and just because you find a specualtion without merit for 
questioning, does 
> not mean it is "baseless".  In fact, a *anything* is possible 
unless canon can 
> prove it untrue.  In my opinion, picking up on small details and 
asking why 
> about them and then pulling, pulling, pulling that thread is 
exactly how we can 
> flush out red herrings and conjure up larger, more complex 
theories.  
> 
> Sorry, maybe I am just overreacting, but when I read your post, I 
thought you 
> were dismissing it out of hand and then it sounded like you were 
criticizing the 
> thread for existing in the first place.  
> 
> Arya

Richard here:

Yes, you over-reacted.  What I intended was to remind people that 
speculation that is not founded in canon is baseless, and those who 
partake of such need to remember this fact.  Too many people at least 
appear to "marry" their pet theories, *PARTICULARLY* those with the 
least basis in canon, then get highly miffed when people say so.  It 
was also acknowledgement that MY explanation was very nearly baseless 
as well.  After all, all we really know about the whereabouts of 
Arthur and Molly is that they were not seen at the Battle of the MoM.

Canon provides the basis for plausible hypotheses for their not 
appearing, but in the end, the only person who knows where they were 
is JKR ... if she even thought about it ... and she may never tell 
us.  Therefore, I am perfectly willing to have JKR settle the matter 
of their whereabouts AND accept it however she settles it, but not 
overly open to imputation of sinister intent because there is no 
basis in canon for such, and ample basis in canon for presuming the 
Weasley parents sincere and honest folk.  I see such speculation as 
verging on the anti-canonical abyss precisely because there is no 
canonical basis for it and some canonical basis for presuming 
otherwise.

I enjoy speculation, but I also am a firm believer in both the right 
of the story-teller to tell his or her story as he or she sees fit, 
and Occam's Razor.  The modernized statement of that razor says that 
the simplest explanation that comprehends all known facts is 
preferrable to more complex ones.  (Einstein's version covers a bit 
more ground than just explanations, and goes, "Make things as simple 
as possible ... but no simpler."  Personally I like this version as 
it reminds us of our fallibility.)

There are some really interesting "houses of cards" out their in 
speculation land.  Elkins offered a very interesting set of theories 
regarding the Crouch family, a while back, that was quite well 
elaborated and presented in a very interesting manner.  However much 
I enjoyed that speculation, I must say that it is still largely 
baseless.  In particular, the Elkins's theory that Barty Crouch, sr., 
was having a sexual affair with Winky is both intrigueing and purely 
speculative ... something that goes well beyond canon and anything 
JKR is *likely* to have intended.  This doesn't mean it is 
impossible.  Just that Elkins should not be surprised or offended if 
others think it a really flaky theory, just as those who think such 
should not be offended if JKR decides to tell us that the theory is 
true wholly or in part.  If JKR blesses it, it becomes a castle built 
upon bedrock.  If she denies it, the house collapses immediately, 
just like any other "house of cards" that finds itself in a bit of a 
breeze.

So, wrapping it all up, let's just say that I would like to see more 
of the speculation here have a sounder basis in canon, less that is 
anti-canonical, and for those offering acanonical speculations to be 
a little less in love with their own ideas and a lot more humble 
about them.

So, what is my personal pet "pure" speculation?  I would LOVE to see 
Harry discover that he has a godmother ... who just happens to be a 
fairy.  I think this is consistent with the Wizarding World, with 
JKR's style and tenor, and with existing canon.  But, will I be 
surprised or hurt if this is NOT the case?  Or if others think the 
idea nuts?  Nope.  I just think it a charming little twist that would 
be fun, and potentially provide some additional interesting plot 
twists.


Richard