World Building And The Potterverse

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 167505

> Betsy Hp:
> Yes, I agree that it's a different sort of mistake.  But, as Ken 
> points out, it's the sheer number of a variety of types of mistakes 
> that have started making me a bit nervous about JKR's ability to 
> steer her ship.
> 
> I get the impression that you think JKR has *chosen* to make these 
> mistakes, that's it's all part of keeping alive a mystery or a brave 
> aesthetic choice.  I'm having a *really* hard time keeping that sort 
> of hope alive.  There are *so many* mistakes on *so many* different 
> levels it starts looking less like a cunning choice and more like 
> sloppiness.

Pippin:

Anyone who decides to create a work of such size and complexity
has chosen to make mistakes. Errors of logic and continuity are 
inevitable -- or at least the probability that they will be introduced 
is far greater than zero, no matter how carefully the author plans 
ahead.  It amuses me that Tolkien is cited as the gold standard.
It seems to be forgotten that he substantially rewrote 
The Hobbit to make it mesh with LOTR, and as for continuity between
LOTR and The Silmarillion, fugeddaboutit. If he's the
ideal, JKR has *nothing* to worry about.

In any case, the probability that corrections will also contain errors 
is also greater than zero, so no matter how carefully one edits a text,
perfection cannot be guaranteed. Knowing this, I think JKR 
decided  have some fun with it. 

As I've said before there are several examples  in PSS where 
things read like mistakes in continuity or sloppy narrative 
technique but turn out to be information from an unreliable 
source or stylistic trickery, such as the narrator's unqualified 
statement that Harry's parents died in a car crash, Scabbers falling 
asleep immediately after attacking Goyle (which makes no sense  
until we learn that he is not only not a real rat but a "sleeper")  
and the switch in PoV which allows JKR to omit any information 
about when Harry regained control of his broom in relation to 
Hermione's attack on Snape. 

I think these examples set the tone for the series. Alongside 
randomly occurring errors in 'maths' and continuity and 
post-publication revisions like the prefects badge makeover, 
we will find apparent 'mistakes' that JKR has planned from the 
beginning which will turn out to be part of the plot. 

 
> Betsy Hp:
> Well, no.  But it certainly plays havoc with our ability to 
> understand Draco as a character.  <snip> How Harry gets 
> his map back is a technical issue.  How Draco got his hand of glory 
> is a wasted chance to show us something.  

Pippin:
But how Draco gets the HoG is a technical issue too -- there's
nothing in the text to indicate that the tension between Draco and
his father had to be resolved in order for him to obtain it. We can
assume that the tension still exists. It's heightened, since we
now know that Draco and his family care for one another despite
the conflicts between them. It does indicate that the relationship
between Draco and Lucius may have started to alter before Voldemort
put his hand in -- you're wondering whether Lucius changed his
mind or Draco achieved some independence, and that, IMO, is
just what JKR wants. As Lucius is still in jail and Draco's fate is
uncertain, their story cannot be over, so the *real* narrative 
mistake, IMO, would be to resolve the tension before it is. 

Pippin