Twist JKR? (was:Re: Dumbledore's pleading...)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 141516

> >>Pippin:
> > <snip>
> > I can't see him pleading with an enemy, only asking one last     
> > favor from a friend.

> >>Nora: 
> I take it that also excludes asking someone he thought was a      
> friend and invested a great deal of exclusive trust in not to take 
> actions harmful to this friend himself.  There's the BANG and the 
> pathos.  I think we'll have to wait and see on this one, of course.

Betsy Hp:
What excludes the betrayer!Snape for me is Dumbledore's peaceful 
look after he dies.  If Dumbledore was truly shocked and dismayed by 
an ESE!Snape, so shocked he actually pleaded with Snape to change 
his mind (and pleading does strike me as very unlike Dumbledore in 
general), wouldn't he have died with a look of deep sadness on his 
face?

> >>Pippin:
> > JKR went out of her way to establish that several things about 
> > Dumbledore's death were unusual, not least that unexplained     
> > plea.
> > <snip>

> >>Nora: 
> The problem here is that JKR's idea of what things are unusual and 
> thus marked and the fandom's ideas are radically divergent, the    
> latter being several times the order of the former.  There's also 
> the question of whether everything we perceive as irregular is     
> meaningfully so.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
That's certainly true! <g>  But the questions surrounding 
Dumbledore's death don't all strike me as nit-picky.  The man *did* 
plead, after all.  Snape *did* have an expression on his face 
(revulsion and hatred) that mirrored Harry's feelings in the cave.  
And Harry *does* think he knows everything at what is arguably the 
mid-point of the story.  All of those things strike me as large 
enough signs to suggest a possible twist in the tale.  After all, 
such signs have been used by JKR in the past.

> >>Nora:
> In fact, I think the whole "JKR is super-twisty" line of argument, 
> which is practically fandom gospel, is probably overrated.  We    
> haven't  had anything Scabbers-class BANG-y in wot, three books or 
> so--but PoA continually gets pulled up as the model to follow,    
> rather than the exceptionally fine (but exceptional) twist of     
> plotting.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Haven't we?  I'd say the Fake!Moody reveal in GoF was awfully BANG-
y.  Especially for young Harry.  And the kidnapping-that-wasn't in 
OotP, while not as BANG-y for the readership I think, certainly 
threw Harry for a loop.

I do agree that fandom does tend to find more twists than are 
actually there. (Caused, I'm sure, by the wait between books.)  But 
that doesn't mean that there are no twists at all.  JKR's handling 
of the Slytherins in HBP strongly suggests, IMO, that the most 
straight forward reading is not necessarily the correct one.

Betsy Hp