World Building And The Potterverse

[va32h]

No: HPFGUIDX 167628

Betsy Hp wrote:
> That you don't understand what 
> a contradiction Draco having the hand is to what we'd learned about 
> the character tells me such.  (snip)
> You're missing what all the rest of us are missing: a scene or 
> comment when the above was established.  I'd also add that *how* 
> Draco got the Hand should have been an important insight into the 
> character.  Did he defy his father's obvious distaste for the sort 
of people who'd own such a thing and buy it on his own?  Did his 
mother defy Lucius and get the hand for Draco?  Did Lucius change his 
mind? That's why Draco's ownership is such a flint, IMO, beyond 
Harry's 
> sneaking the Marauder's map from Fake!Moody's office.  While Harry 
> snagging his map is completely in character, Draco getting the hand 
> actually goes *against* how he's been presented up until now.  If 
> Lucius sneered at the Hand, Draco would sneer at the Hand from then 
> on.  Something occurred to change that, either with Lucius or with 
> Draco.  Or, more likely, JKR recalled mentioning the hand and Draco 
> together and forgot that the mention had to do with Draco *not* 
> getting the hand.

va32h here:

I don't think Draco's getting the hand behind his father's back is a 
change in character for Draco. One of the first things we hear Draco 
say - ever - is "I think I'll bully Father" into letting him bring a 
forbidden broom to school. Of course we know he didn't *succeed* in 
that quest, but he was certainly willing to try. And at this stage of 
the story, Lucius is not only in jail, but he is Voldemort's least 
favorite Death Eater, and Draco is quite puffed up about being  given 
the assignment that is supposed to redeem the Malfoy name. I have no 
trouble seeing Draco willing to defy the wishes of a father whose 
incompetence got him in jail and on the wrong side of Voldemort. 

We aren't shown Draco acquiring the Peruvian Instant Darkness Powder 
either, but apparently he did. So my assumption was that he obtained 
the two objects at the same time - perhaps he saw the Darkness Powder 
in the Weasley's Wizard Wheezes catalog and thought of the Hand - and 
ordered them both by mail or asked one of the DEs assigned to his 
project to obtain them. 

I do agree that Ron shouldn't have recognized it, unless Harry gave a 
remarkably detailed description four years ago to Ron - but the 
dialogue for Ron is certainly written as if Ron recognized it as a 
matter of course, and that is a continuity blip. But it's not keeping 
me awake at night, quite honestly. 

Betsy Hp:
> For one, doesn't JKR bristle at the idea that she's 
> writing "children's books"?  For another, I think what's being 
> pointed out is that *not* being "overly concerned with world-
> building" has not served her well.  And finally, interestingly 
enough 
> I read JKR more for her characters than her plot.  Weird, huh?


va32h here: 
Actually I thought it was the complete opposite. I certainly don't 
think she finds it insulting to be considered a children's author, if 
that is what you mean. I am having trouble finding an indicative 
quote, because the word's "Children's author" bring up pretty much 
every interview on accio-quote - because the interviews all 
begin "children's author JK Rowling says..." But then I don't seem to 
find anything written anywhere that says she hates being called a 
children's author either...

However I did find this quote: "I loathe books that have 
inconsistencies and leave questions unanswered. Loopholes bug the 
h**l out of me ... so I try to be meticulous and make sure that 
everything operates according to laws, however odd, so that everyone 
understands exactly how and why." Syndney Morning Herald 2001. 

So I am not sure I would say that Jo is *NOT* concerned with world 
building. I'd say she's human - and as such makes mistakes. And 
apparently her editors are human too, because really, we avid readers 
are certainly a bright lot, but we aren't possessed of singular 
brilliance. If JKR and her various editors failed to catch or correct 
plot anomalies - they are probably not considered substantial enough 
to notice or correct. 

va32h