Which way?

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 101865

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mooseming" <jo.sturgess at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> ><major snipage>
> > There's a metaphorical  split in the road somewhere ahead; one way goes 
> > the traditional route towards the theories that are most popular, the 
> > other path could go somewhere else entirely. The scene seems set for 
> > both possibilities; which way will  Jo  take us?
> > 
> > Kneasy
> 
> I'm not so sure there is a split ahead. JKR has created a series of
> books that can be categorised under a multitude of genres:
>  
> Children's book (although I suspect that more adults have read it than
> children)
> Odyssey
> Mystery (see posts on Red Herrings)
> Fantasy (real magicalism anyone?)
> Trilogy (Like LOTR but as in Douglas Adams book four in the trilogy)
> Morality tale (not unlike the Chronicles of Narnia also a 7 volume work) 
> Social critique (see Dan's post no 101776)
> Action/Adventure
> Romance (if the shippers have their way)
>  
> Rather than perceiving this approach as creating a new sub genre it is
> best viewed as a meta genre. 
>

Kneasy:
Yes it can, I agree, *but* and this is the point I was struggling towards,
the classification of HP will to a large extent depend on how she handles
the resolution. This is liable to be given a greater weighting, especially
if it is non-traditional, than any other theme in the tale. In what are
generally regarded as 'good'  books, when viewed in retrospect the 
ending seems inevitable; any other a travesty. So out of the list above
which 'typical' resolution will prevail? Or will it be something different,
an ending that alludes to some of those genre, but invites the reader
to contemplate  a fresh or unexpected perspective?

> Jo  
> There isn't to my knowledge a history for this type of polyglot style,
> it is full on post modernism. There are writers working now with a
> similar approach (Jasper Fford springs to mind) but not a tradition as
> such.
>  
> Rather than follow a well established path JKR is weaving many paths
> into a tapestry, a big picture. The conclusion then becomes not an end
> point reached by a linear rationale but a complex, messy, living whole.
> 

Kneasy: 
Hmm. Well, she did take a broad canvas to start with. If you intend to
spread yourself over 7 volumes all of which are almost exclusively set
in a very limited geographical location, you do have much more scope to
introduce and resolve plot intricacies. I wonder what 'Kim" would be
like if expanded by a similar amount. I enjoy Fford, but not for his
plots; it's those terrible puns that I find irresistible, most (all?) of which
would be incomprehensible to American readers; they're too local. 

> Jo:  
> At the end of the series we will be able to stand back and see the
> wood from the trees but I doubt very much we will all see the same
> wood! I shall return to these lists to read others observations and
> learn from them just as I do now. We still won't have the answer we
> will have greater understanding and that is not the same thing at all!
>
Kneasy:
We'd better not all see the same wood, that would mean that the author
has imposed a strict orthodoxy from which no reasonable person can
deviate. My natural perversity kicks against being force-fed like a
Strasburg goose. I get stroppy.
  
> Jo
> (Thanking Kneasy for the intelligence, imagination and sheer hard work
> he puts into his posts!)

Kneasy:
T'ain't nuthin. Garrulous old farts don't often get the opportunity to
vapour on without interruption, so one makes the most of it when a chance
does arise.