Conspiracy Theories

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 96615

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" 
<jferer at y...> wrote:
> I'll say up front that I am not a conspiracy theorist; conspiracy
 theories seem to start on the premise that nothing is what it 
seems, and that unseen external forces manipulate the world 
and everything in it. <

In the Potterverse, this is the case. JKR is an unseen external 
force which manipulates the world and everything in it, a world 
which purports to be a real place and yet does not exist. 

The author conspires with the readers to give us information 
which is hidded from  the people in the story, by tricks such as 
revelatory character names, and direct messages to the reader 
like "strange and mysterious things would soon be 
happening."  PS/SS Chapter One, paragraph 5.

Meanwhile the characters are, of course, engaged in a vast 
conspiracy to hide the existence of magic from *us*, greatly 
aided by our   tenacious habit of believing that nothing strange or 
mysterious really happens and that everything is what it appears 
to be, except when it appears to be rather odd.

Jim:
> Therefore, good people are evil  

Pippin:
Good people can make bad choices. Isn't that what we see Harry 
doing all the time? 

Jim:
evil people are misunderstood,

Pippin:
Evil people are  misunderstood frequently in the 
Potterverse--usually they are misunderstood as being good, but  
Sirius was  misunderstood to have done dreadful things and so 
was  Hagrid. Harry wonders  if he is evil, sometimes fears that 
he is mad, and feels that nearly everyone misunderstands him.

Jim:
and everyone has a hidden agenda. 

 Pippin:
cough*Snape*cough.  What's the  Dursley's greatest fear? That 
someone will discover their secret. Hermione's implemented 
one secret plan after another. Even Ron, he of the sneakoscope 
ears, has a secret plan to join the Quidditch team. Too bad the 
dust-jacket gave it away. JKR sending signals to the reader 
behind Harry's back. Again.

Jim:
> But this is a Harry Potter discussion group, so here's my point: 
I don't think JKR is a conspiracy theorist, either. She particularly 
will not give us examples of treachery on the part of characters 
close to Harry.  This would be a terrible betrayal of young readers 
by an author. What would it teach them?<

Pippin:
Erm, beware of  rats who sleep in your bed?  JKR reports that 
she was shocked, pre-PoA, when a young reader asked if there 
was something up with Scabbers. The signs in the story  were 
*not*  supposed to be noticed until after Scabbers was revealed. 
And she has said that she'll be highly annoyed if someone 
manages to work out one of the things that is going to happen.

Jim: 
> The world is no damn good;
> 
> Love, loyalty and friendship aren't real. Goodness isn't real. 
Only evil and selfishness are real;
> 
> Don't believe in or trust anyone.
> 
> IOW, Voldemort was right all along.

Huh? If one person betrays another in a book, children will learn 
that  they  shouldn't trust anybody ever?  Guess we shouldn't let 
them read the New Testament. Or even Little Red Riding Hood.

I don't think so.  It seems that young children simply ignore the 
message rather than abandon their innocence.  George Lucas 
says that kids under six insist that good Anakin Skywalker and 
evil Darth Vader are  two different people. No child gets 
nightmares because evil Captain Hook and 
pompous-but-lovable Mr. Darling are the same actor in Peter 
Pan, or wonders why Little Red didn't recognize the wolf. We 
educate with make-believe so that we can introduce threatening 
knowledge in a way that lets children absorb it only when they 
are ready. 

Jim:
> Could someone we know betray Harry? Yes. If it happens, we 
wil see some form of warning (an incident, perhaps subtle) of a 
change in heart or a slight someone may seek revenge for.  We 
definitely could see treachery in someone outside the inner 
circle, a DA member, perhaps.<

Pippin:
Sure.  But it's far more likely that we'll say, "Wow! I didn't see 
*that* coming, and then realize that the signs were there all 
along. That's JKR's genius.
 
Jim:
> There have been many such theories floating around, and they 
never turn out.  There was one massive construct promoted with 
amused derision for anybody who didn't "get it" that took a 
torpedo in the engine room the day OoP was published.<

Pippin:
There was a lively debate over whether it was instructive to 
interpret the text without regard to the signposts directed at the 
reader *cough*meta-thinking*cough. But nobody ever claimed 
that it was a reliable method of guessing what might happen 
next.

ESE!Lupin *was* constructed around the clues which I found in 
the text, and not, as some seem to think, from a perverse belief 
that anyone who seems nice is up to no good.  I will admit to 
wanting to rattle the chains of some Snape-bashers, though <g>

As a fan of Agatha Christie, I can tell you that you will 
seldom err in suspecting the nicer of the two young men in the 
cast, especially if no one knows much about him, he has a ten 
year gap in his past, and his best buddy turns up dead.

Pippin