there's more to HP than the ship

[sienna291973]

No: HPFGUIDX 134011

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Milz" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
>Milz:
Wow! Emerson is catching the heat from the H-Hr shippers at
Mugglenet.com. Some of those shippers are also lashing out at Rowling
and threatening never to read another Harry Potter book again...

Grapes sour much?

Now me:
Actually Milz, it's not that. It's that it was done in such a poor 
way. I know I have been one of those fans that have argued long and 
hard that H/Hr might actually be the way JK Rowling was developing 
the books. It was a long-shot, but the theories we developed were 
painstakingly researched and meticulously put together. It's not that 
we didn't see the `anvil-like' clues, its just it didn't make sense 
to us in terms of Hermione's character and behaviour and so we looked 
for other explanations and thought we might have found them. (I still 
wonder about Hermione's characterisation, but that's another post).

The reason so many H/Hr shippers are now reacting so emotionally is 
that, not only were their hopes dashed (as were many people's who had 
come up with much beloved theories that were sunk in HBP) but they 
were dashed quite rudely too. If I remember correctly, those who 
hypothesised that Ron was Dumbledore (despite very little evidence) 
were congratulated on having developed an ingenious theory. Those who 
have postulated that Neville and Luna might form a relationship were 
gently let down. For some reason, it is the H/Hr shippers who were 
made to endure barbs from other fans about being delusional, goaded 
on by the author about the `anvil like' clues that we missed and 
would somehow pick up if we read the books again (read them 100 times 
already, thanks), and then called `angry' and `militant' by the 
author herself. She even had another go at us in her note on her 
website about the interview with Emmerson, which I feel is in very 
poor taste. (Not to mention the nice little jabs she had at the 
hippogriff-love theory in the narrative itself). I mean, we got it. 
Its sunk. Its okay to stop now.

I don't mind that the books have gone a different way to what I 
expected (hey
 that's mystery writing for you and half the fun is 
having a go at predicting what comes next). I do wonder at the 
vitriol and at why it was felt at all necessary. I fully accept that 
we saw more there than there was to see but isn't engaging with the 
text in a deeper way something that should be encouraged by the 
author and not discouraged?

(I'm sorry if I offend. It's just by way of explanation).

Sienna