[HPforGrownups] Re: The Too Unreliable Narrator (was: What really happene...

[Lynda Cordova]

No: HPFGUIDX 155958

wynnleaf

>Does this mean, Lynda, that if I am not surprised if Harry turns out
not to have PT'd Fennir, that JKR wasn't cheating? I mean, I didn't
really think Harry did that PT. So if *I* don't feel cheated, is JKR
in the clear?

Lynda:  If you want to see it that way, you can say that she is.  I won't
feel cheated, because I don't think it was Harry that cast that spell, but
even if I did think so, and was wrong, is that not part of the joy of
reading, to find some surprises from situations we 'think' we know about?
And at the same time to be right in what we think is going on (as in the
Felix situation that brought this up) and to find out, we were right, that
our author carried through as usual?

Nikkalmati:
I guess that the Fennir PT situation is a potential clear-cut
non-description. If Harry did the PT, he knows it and we don't. No
non-description cheat.
If Harry did not do the PT, he does not know who did it and we don't either.

If the PT turns out to be important in Book 7, we both have been fooled?
Is this right?

Lynda:  I guess so.  There's a strong possibility that the PT will be
important in the next book (the identity of the caster at least--it could be
a key factor).  When using the narrator as she does, it gives JKR some
leeway in these situations and adds a bit of mystery to the story.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]