Rowling/writer's block (WAS: Are we having fun?)

[msbeadsley]

No: HPFGUIDX 80704

Wanda Sherratt:
> Well, to be quite honest, I don't believe Rowling when she says she 
> didn't have writer's block for OotP.  I think she's lying - and if 
> people can argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar, I think 
> I'm entitled to say the same about Rowling!

Entitled?  Okay.  Likely to persuade anyone else?  That's different.  
(Likely to be pilloried here?  Another question entirely.) And I have 
not seen anyone argue convincingly that Dumbledore is a liar; anyway, 
*I* am not convinced. ;-)

Wanda:
> It's not as if she has no reason to lie about such a thing.  One  
> of her most noticeable characteristics is that she is quite a 
> control freak - of course she's going to pretend that everything is 
> fine and under control, and that despite the bizarre book she just 
> turned out, "Everything is for the best in the best of all possible 
> worlds."

Please go and (if you haven't) read the entire interview which can be 
found at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/uk/newsid_3004000/3004878.stm
It did convince me that writer's block wasn't her problem. (BTW, what 
had happened was that I'd only read the earlier part of this 
interview, then tried to go back and found the Albert Hall one 
instead.)

> Sure, she'll admit to having had writer's block when writing CoS - 
> now, years later, when the book is obviously a success and her 
> admission doesn't mean anything.  But I knew she was having 
> writer's block more than a year ago, when the deadline for 
> publication kept being extended season by season.  And I'll say 
> more: OotP has "nervous breakdown" written all over it.  I think 
> she was in the impossible situation of *having* to produce a book 
> and feeling unable to do so, and this tortured hulk is the result 
> of all that strain.  Maybe she's over it, and maybe she's not.  
> I'll know when the next book comes out - or if it DOESN'T come out, 
> just like OotP for several years.

After reading the interview in its entirety, I am now thinking that 
what is easily perceived as OoP having "nervous breakdown written all 
over it" or writer's block is actually the opposite: JKR under 
pressure holds the reins of the narrative tighter. Given as much 
leeway as she allowed herself with OoP (as stated by the interview in 
that she flatly refused to strive for any deadline), she wandered 
into depths and tangled up traces she hadn't had *time* to do in the 
earlier books. Something certainly happened, and, IMO, it wasn't 
something good. I don't necessarily dislike the intense darkness in 
OoP.  But combined with its departure from the "one book, one 
mystery, (some) satisfaction guaranteed" formula, the IMO obvious 
deliberation with which JKR went about setting up for the final two 
books (a flaw in the overall series that so much of it was necessary 
in any one book, again IMO), and poor *Harry's* near nervous 
breakdown and torture and lack of hope, it's my least favorite of the 
books so far.  I shall approach the next with resolve and a certain 
caution I lacked with OoP.

Sandy, aka "msbeadsley" muttering "'nuff said already," leaning back 
with head on soap box to admire the Dog Star twinkling in the night 
sky and letting her mind go mercifully blank