Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets )

[delwynmarch]

No: HPFGUIDX 118578


Naama wrote :
"Obviously, if we didn't have these local mysteries, each individual
book would be much less interesting - but they have little to do with
the central mystery of the relationship between Voldemort and Harry. 
And this mystery is not at all of the whodunnit type. It goes deeper,
and is more closely related to theme (love? power of good? power of
evil? etc.) than to plot. At least, that's my understanding of the
series' structure."

Del replies :
You might be right. But the truth is : we don't know. You might be
right, but you might also be wrong. We know very little about the real
relationship between Harry and LV.

Naama wrote : 
"In saying that JKR isn't writing a spy novel, I'm not belittling the
genre. Just that, if she isn't, then it doesn't make sense,
*thematically*, for her to dwell so much on such issues - as required
for ESE!Lupin, PuppetMaster!DD theories."

Del replies :
Agreed. But JKR has already put some elements of spy novels in the HP
series (traitors, double agents, secret plans...), so we don't know
how  important those elements will be in the next books. Will their
importance decrease, or will it dramatically increase ?

Naama wrote :
" The question is not whether there are spies and traitors. We know
there are - Pettigrew and Snape are both double agents (well, Snape
probably).  But how important are these aspects of the struggle
against Voldemort within the story? Is there much weight in the story
to  inherent suspicion of anybody and everybody as possible
spies/traitors? This connects back to my original point, that JKR is
not writing a spy novel. Although these aspects exist in the story,
they are not it's focus. "

Del replies :
The whole series is born out of the betrayal of a double agent. I
would say this points to the possibility that spies and traitors might
yet play other big parts.

Naama wrote :
" It's not about my preferences - it's about what I understand to be
contained in the text itself: Characters are generally stable; the
story is not focused on questioning the possiblity of true perception
of others, etc. "

Del replies :
I disagree. In every book, Harry keeps learning that some people are
not completely what he thinks they are.

Naama wrote :
"But what types of misleading does JKR use? If you actually look at
the story, as I tried to show, case by case, in my previous post, she
doesn't tend to mislead through presenting us with a character that is
of quality x, and then showing us that he is really of quality y. 
Durselys, Malfoys, Snape are presented from the very beginning as
nasty, and continue being nasty the whole way through. Ron, Hermione,
Neville (and Harry), Weasleys - nice, and continue being nice, and so
on and so on. Other than Tom Riddle (and possibly Quirrel - although
he was possessed by Voldemort, so Harry and we have never really met
the real Quirrel) who has JKR mislead us about in this way? "

Del replies :
The trick is that many characters are rather stable, but not all.
The Dursleys and the Malfoys are stable baddies for example, but Snape
is not. He wasn't after the Philosophical Stone, he wasn't trying to
kill Harry, he didn't remain a DE until LV's fall, he took great risks
to help DD, he is a member of the Order. The very reason that Snape is
such a popular character is because he seems completely unstable.
On the good side, Ron, Hermione, Neville and Harry seem like stable
characters. But we learned in OoP that the Weasleys are unstable as an
entity : Percy is a wild card, we still don't know which way he will
definitely turn.
I guess this is why ESE!Lupin is such an attractive theory : because
Lupin seems to be the epitome of the stable good guy, but there are
little tidbits that don't seem to add up.
Just like there were little tidbits that didn't seem to add up in
Peter's actions, and they should have raised suspicions.

Naama wrote :
" But why does the mustard have to be cut via a strained, incredibly 
intricate and fiddly plot twist?"

Del replies :
Why not ?
That's the incredible fun of discussing a work in progress : you can
cut your mustard nicely, others can cut it via a nearly-impossible
way, and yet others can choose anything in-between. We can pick and
choose any way we like, and we can even choose several ways at a time.

Del