[HPforGrownups] Who is Faith? WAS: Re: What Came First: Task or Cabinet?

[elfundeb]

No: HPFGUIDX 157767

An old-timer emerges to discuss Faith --

Alla wrote:


>   > In the TBAY, as far as I am aware ( and this is from the POV of
> > somebody who loved to read TBAY and hopes people will come back to
> > it, but never wrote it) the Faith is the personification of the
> > authoritarial intent, basically she accepts as given of what is
> > written on the page, period.
>

Debbie:
Though Faith seems to have acquired this interpretation over the years, my
recollection of the time was that Faith embodied an unwillingness to embrace
the most wild speculations on the list.  Faith relished her naivete and
gullibility, perhaps not least because she *wanted* to be surprised.

Kimberly, from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/35966:
[Faith] loves the pins and needles of
waiting for new Bangs; she's the little voice in the back of my head
that wants JKR to take her time. She wants to draw it all out as
long as possible so she can wallow in suspense.

Debbie:
 Faith also recoils against the sadistic tendencies of certain speculators,
instinctively rejecting such tropes as Tortured!Neville and cries of "Bloody
Ambush!" to explain just why Dumbledore trusts Snape.  Faith's defense
against the bloodthirstiness of the F.E.A.T.H.E.R.B.O.A.S. (Foaming
Enthusiasts of Ambush, Torture, and Hostility, Embracing Really
Blood-thirsty Operations And Savagery) crowd was to employ her canon as a
yardstick to test theories, and not surprisingly, she found most of them
wanting.

Thus, while Faith derives a certain level of amusement from speculation,
she became a strict constructionist and therefore, very little speculation
will survive her scrutiny.

Kimberly, from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/35878 :

<In fact I like reading
pretty much all the theories, but I haven't yet found one that gives
me a "eureka!" kinda thing. I think it's Faith's fault - she keeps
tapping me on the shoulder and saying things like "Shouldn't we let
the author decide that?" and "We can't know this yet.", and "tsk,
tsk." . . . I guess, though, even if she's not really a
theory, she's a fairly decent school of thought for now (until I come
across a real "eureka!").>

Debbie:
So, when Neri, for example, invites Faith to bless a theory, what he means
is that its canon is airtight, and that despite her distaste for dabbling in
theories, subversive or otherwise, that take the canon in a new direction,
his theory is worthy of a "eureka!" from her.  OTOH, I think Faith would
find "The Cabinet Came First" to be the A.N.T.I.T.H.E.S.I.S. (All Nice
Theories, I Think; However, Each Supposition Is Strained) of Faith.

Carol wrote:
> Faith may be the personification of authorial intention, but the
> problem is, authorial intention can't always be determined by what's
> on the page. You have to look at other things, chiefly the
limitations
> of Harry's pov and the reasons why a character might be providing
> incomplete or misleading information (Hermione suggesting that Tonks
> is suffering from survivor's guilt, for example, or Hagrid saying
that
> all DEs are from Slytherin) to determine what the author is up to.

Debbie:
Perhaps we should ask whether Faith really personifies authorial intent.  I
might characterize Faith's articulation of authorial intent as believing the
author intends for us to be taken in, at least some of the time.  (Did you
really think Mad-Eye was really Barty Crouch in disguise?)  As such,
Faith represents a method of reading the books as much as a method of
interpreting them.

Debbie
still enamored of Tortured!Neville theories


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