Potterverse timelines just don't fit the RW (was: JKR has updated her site today -- WEBSITE SPOILER!)

[Geoff Bannister]

No: HPFGUIDX 158339

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jordan Abel" <random832 at ...> wrote:
>
> On 9/14/06, hickengruendler <hickengruendler at ...> wrote:
> >
> > > Dave:
> > >
> > > That's Why I have always asserted that it is pointless to try to
> > > assign definite RW dates to the events of the books, e.g. Harry was
> > > born in 1980.  Things just don't work out -- full moons on the wrong
> > > dates, anachronistic Playstations, etc., etc. > > > --

<snip>

> > > P.S. I think the only reason Nick's cake said he died in 1492 is
> > > that's such a familiar date to people -- I think it's just as
> > > likely that Nick has lost track of the exact year he died, and
> > perhaps
> > > has celebrated his "500th Deathday" for some years now...

> > Hickengruendler:

> > We do however have another definite date by now, even though it
> > appears outside of the books. On the Black family tree, Draco's
> > birthyear is given as 1980, meaning that's Harry's birthyear as well.
> > Obviously it doesn't fit will several details, but no year fits. And
> > what especially doesn't fit, is that both in GoF and OotP September
> > 1st is on a Monday. Jo just doesn't pay attention to this. That's why
> > I tend to see the year 1980 as Canon while overlooking the
> > inconsistencies.

Random832;
> 1980/1991, though, is apparently a very poor fit for the data. About
> the only thing going for it is authorial intent, and it's even more
> clear that the author's _real_ intent was to leave it ambiguous so
> that the story would be timeless. There is evidence that she was
> working from a 1991 timeline, but there's also evidence that she was
> using "as she writes" dates (Flamel's age) or just not caring
> (weekdays, full moons)

Geoff:
My feeling is that the suggestion that JKR had "authorial intent" is the 
correct one. If it was her intent to make the story timeless, she could 
just as well left any date year date references out.

I see the Deathday reference as intended to set a benchmark date to 
satisfy perhaps herself and readers where the events fit into the present 
day - which I personally like.

Authors can take varying views about their handling of dates, Let me 
give two diametrically opposed examples. One of my favourite books 
is "To serve them all my days" by R.F.Delderfield. It tells the story of a 
young officer invalided out of the First World War in 1918 who goes to 
a small public school on Exmoor to teach. We follow him from 1918 
up to 1940 when, as Headmaster, he is dealing with similar wartime 
problems to the Head who first employed him. Delderfield's timelines 
are, in places hopeless. People age at the wrong rate, events are juggled 
around in retrospect and so on.

Compare this with J.R.R.Tolkien and "The Lord of the Rings". He 
sometimes spent days and even weeks battling with phases of the 
moon and such information in an attempt to get his created world 
absolutely flawless.

I like both books immensely regardless of whether the timelines fit 
or not.

Quite frankly, are we creating a great deal of unnecessary fluster 
over JKR's dates? Is this going to be of vital imporance in Book 7?  
We know that parallels have been drawn between Grindelwald and 
Hitler because of the 1945 date. But will the exact date of Tom 
Riddle's time at Hogwarts affect the story?

I read for pleasure. I enjoy the Harry Potter books far more than 
many others I have read. But I do not read them with the intent of 
nitpicking over which day of the week an event falls on or whether 
two people were contemporaries at Hogwarts unless I feel that it 
is of paramount importance to the plot. I read them to lose myself 
in their world and to meet with my "friends" who lives I like to share 
away from the hassle and pressure of the real world. 

Willing suspension of disbelief rules. OK?