Snape, Snape, Loverly Snape...and authorial intent

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 148232

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" <leslie41 at ...> wrote:

<snip>

> But in the realm of literary criticism, Rowling's opinion is not 
> the trump card.  Not at all.  It just tells you what SHE thinks of 
> her work, not what's necessarily there.

This has some truth to it.  However, there is a contrary and equally 
strong principle: never bet against the author in a work in progress.

Rowling's opinions of her characters may well come even more solidly 
to the forefront in the conclusions to the novels, depending on what 
kind of ending or even just endgame plot she feels like writing.  And 
one thing she could easily do is destroy a large number of currently 
viable alternative interpretations.  Any work is open to a number of 
interpretations, or it usually wouldn't be worth reading--but there 
comes a point where, if you value the ability to support your 
argument with citations and don't want to have to work too hard to 
explain away concrete facts you don't like, some interpretations fall 
away.

If you take JKR's comments about her characters seriously, some 
possibilities begin to strike one as less likely.  And then the room 
is open that a reading of a character may not only never come into 
the forefront and be confirmed (such as the 'Snape is only being mean 
to keep his cover'), but may actually be shot down.

It all depends on what each reader is reading for, as well.  Lots of 
people are happier with fanon than canon.  But 'author is dead' is 
hardly an overwhelmingly dominant critical position anymore.

-Nora hopes that the author in question stays decidedly not dead