Dean Thomas, the Weasley Cousins, and Character Backstories

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 150540

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at ...> wrote:
>
>  
> >   kchuplis:
> >   Well, I didn't really mean to imply it was canon. ...edited...
> 
> 
> Potioncat:
> This is a tough one. In my mind, without having actually sat down to 
> work it out, I thought the back story was still valid. That is, Dean 
> and his mother do not know the truth....nor does the casual reader. 
> 
> ...edited...

bboyminn:

I consider most of JKR's website and most of her interviews as
'canon-ish'. They have some validity, but we must be care not to
regard them as too absolute.

Most of the time, on both her website and in JKR's many interviews,
she is speaking 'conversationally'. When a person speaks
converstationally, they speak in generalities and to the best of their
immediate knowledge given the pressure and time constrains of this
type of communication. Or, they speak to make a point in either a very
narrow or very broad context. This is very true in interview, and
somewhat true on her website. This effects the weight that you can
give to these statements.

So, we have to be carefull not to get too carried away by her casual
comments, because they are just that, casual. However, there are times
when she is relaying cold hard canon facts, and I believe the
backstory of Dean Thomas is one of these cases. This is not backstory
revealed in the way the dropped and changed characters are revealed.
Dean's backstory is very detailed and very real. These are fact (what
I consider facts) that not even the characters in the story know.
Dean's mother only suspect that Dean's father might have been a
wizard. Dean doesn't know anything at all. But, the framework in which
this information is presented seems very factual, and I think we can
consider it canon. However, it is useless canon, because it will never
appear in the story. 

JKR has said that she has the life story of every major character
worked out in rather substantial detail. It helps her understand their
motivations and actions. But despite the very real and detailed
backstories, we as readers are not likely to very be priviledge to
this information. 

This is all quite different from story and character changes that JKR
had to make in order to get the story to work. The female Weasley
cousin was removed from the story, but we don't know for a fact that
she ceased to exist. Arthur apparently has several brothers, who are
likely married, which means that several Weasley cousins do exist. But
since they add no value to the story, we simply don't hear about them.
Although, since Bill's wedding is coming up, I suspect we will meet
several cousin in the next book, but I also suspect we will only meet
them in passing. In a sense, we will be told that they are there, but
we will never really meet one face-to-face. 

Here is an example of how we could meet them without actually meeting
them -

"One the day of the wedding, the Weasley house was a bussle of
activity. The house and garden were filled with countless Weasley
uncles, aunts, and cousins. Mrs. Weasley tried to introduce Harry to
everyone, but it made him feel uncomfortable the way they stared at
his scar. So, Ron, Hermione, and Harry kept to themselves as much as
possible trying to stay at the finges of the maddening crowd."

And so on and so forth. So, in my imaginary scenario 'countless' new
Weasley are introduced, but we never actually get to meet them. 

Of course, I don't know for sure whether cousin Mafalda still exists
or not. Only that her storying line being dropped doesn't necessarily
erase her from off-page canon. 

There is much of the back story of many characters that is canon to
JKR, it's just canon we will never know. Sort of like the Lost Books
of the Bible. 

Despite my endless rambling, I think my point is that the manner in
which Dean Thomas's backstory is presented on JKR's website makes it
canon. JKR give a very detailed account, and that fact that this story
will never be presented in the books doesn't invalidate it.

However, the manner in which the backstory of cousin Mafalda is
presented does to some extent cast doubt on the continued validity of
her story. There is a possibility that this particular cousin does not
exist despite the likelihood of the existence of other Weasley cousins.

Again, I fear I am rambling. Does anyone see the point I'm trying to
make here?

Steve/bboyminn