World Building And The Potterverse

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 167520

> >>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.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Well yes, of course.  But again, *so* many mistakes on *so* many 
different levels.  It speaks to a not so careful planning.  Which is 
bothersome, IMO.

> >>Pippin:
> 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. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I really, really don't get the idea that JKR is making continuity 
errors (or character inconsistencies or math holes or world building 
contradictions) for the *fun* of it.  I mean, this would mean you'd 
have to accept the idea that Dumbledore's still flowing blood in HBP 
was a "fun" mistake on JKR's part to send readers harrying of in 
a "he took a while to die!" direction.  Wouldn't that annoy you if in 
DH it turns out that no, Dumbledore was dead the second he was 
blasted off the tower, and JKR just stuck in strangely behaving blood 
as a clever use of the sort of mistakes authors will make?
 
> >>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. 

Betsy Hp:
So JKR purposefully planned on her reader getting jerked out of the 
story in HBP?  She's going to bring up that whole Hand of Glory issue 
in DH (along with a myriad of other issues) to show us what the real 
state of Draco's relationship with his father was back in HBP?  (Or, 
more properly, back in an earlier book, since it seems Draco had had 
the hand for a little while there).

I'm sorry, but that seems a particularly ridiculous way of keeping a 
secret from the readers.  And if JKR was honestly wanting to go in 
that sort of direction she should have put a tag on the incident by 
having Harry remember that as far as he knew Draco never had the 
Hand, either at the point it's brought up in HBP or when Draco 
actually got the thing and that fact made the rumor mills (because 
I'm still curious as to how *Ron* of all people knew about it). Then 
the actual *method* of Draco getting the Hand remains a narrative 
mystery to be concluded in the grand finale.

Honestly though, I doubt the fact that Draco's got his hand of glory 
is all that important to the overall story.  So I doubt it'll ever be 
addressed again.  Which means it was a moment of sloppiness on JKR's 
part.  One, unfortunately, of many.

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > Which is why I'm still holding out for DH. <g> But I will admit
> > I'm not too hopeful. At this point I'm just hoping the main      
> > characters stay semi-recognizable (and the trio become a little   
> > less cruel).
> > <snip>

> >>Lupinlore:
> Well, after OOTP and HBP, I wouldn't hang my hat on any characters
> acting in believable or consistent ways, particularly if there is
> emotion involved. JKR's characters seem to vary between volcanic and
> reptilian, with little in-between.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
They do tend to, I agree.  Though I think that's been fairly 
consistent with JKR's style throughout.  And I'm all for 
consistentcy.  <g>

I do think Dumbledore was badly mishandled.  (frex: While I can 
accept that magically there was no surer way to protect Harry than 
sticking him with the Dursleys, that oddly rude little lecture 
Dumbledore gave the Dursleys in HBP shook my acceptence that any sort 
of wizard interference would have put Harry on the street.  It was an 
odd choice on JKR's part, IMO.)  

But I think Dumbledore was a sort of dues ex machina (always arriving 
in the nick of time to save the day, but missing for long enough for 
things to get really tense first) so I'm not sure JKR really thought 
too much about his characterization beyond a unique quirk or two.

> >>Lupinlore:
> As for the trio becoming less "cruel," well, I think as long as    
> child-abusing Snapey-poo is not clearly punished and has not       
> offered a sincere and humble apology, any move to "correct" the    
> trio's behavior would indicated severe moral derangement on JKR's   
> part. And as long as Umbridge is still unchastened, dealing with   
> the trio's moral "defects" would represent a move on JKR's part for 
> which I would recommend heavy psychoactive medication.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Hmm, while I know we'll never agree on how to look at Snape, I do 
think there's a difference between say Hermione remaining cruel and 
Umbridge remaining cruel.  Umbridge is a villain.  The reader, 
knowing this, hisses at her when she walks on stage and cheers when 
the Centaurs cart her off to do JKR knows what with her.  If Umbridge 
never changes she's still seen as a bad egg.  It doesn't matter if 
Umbridge admits to being bad or not.  She is what she is.

But we're supposed to (I think, anyway) *like* the Trio, cheer for 
them, etc.  That I don't really like them all that much at the moment 
takes away from my enjoyment of the story.  So if Hermione remains as 
cruel as she's been in DH, and never changes, does that mean I was 
supposed to like it?  That I was supposed to cheer on her moments of 
cruelty and admire it?  That's where the dissonance comes in for me.  
It's easy and right to hiss the villain, but one really shouldn't be 
hissing the hero.

Betsy Hp