[HPforGrownups] Re: 7 reasons why - The Glass is Half Empty.

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 174827

>> > Steve <bboyminn at ...> wrote:
>> >> People keep saying that there is no explanation for
>> >> that letter being there, yet when explanations are
>> >> suggested, they are written off as fan-fiction and
>> >> fantasy. Well, you either want an explanation or
>> >> your don't; apparently, many don't.
>
>> k12listmomma:
>>
>> Steve, I guess I will have to explain my take on this.
>> ... We, as readers, shouldn't have to be looking for
>> ways to plug the holes in Rowling's story for the
>> FINAL BOOK. ...
>
> bboyminn:
>
> Sorry you feel that way, but this is only a plot hole
> because you choose not to believe it. That FACT IS,
> the letter was there. Now you can chose to believe
> it couldn't be there, even though it was, or you can
> choose to believe it /was/ there and accept
> explanations as to why.
>
> This isn't a problem with the story, this is a problem
> with what /you/ choose to believe or not believe.
>
> In my book (a pun), choosing to believe what is
> written on the page always seem to make more sense.
>
> The letter is an extremely minor part of the overall
> story. JKR simply can't waste precious pages explaining
> every little minor point. The Letter was there, now on
> with the story.
>
> And I am out of here.
>
> Steve/bboyminn

Steve, I think you really missed my whole point. I am not arguing whether 
the letter was there or not. Really, I'm NOT! I don't have a problem with 
what I "choose to believe"- rather I have a problem with what's written and 
more importantly, HOW it's written!

My greater point is that whole transition with Snape. The letter is the 
first real, tangible clue she gives (not to us, but to HARRY!) that Snape 
was really on Dumbledore's side- it's the start of a HUGE transition point 
from Harry thinking that Snape hated him to thinking that Snape was a brave 
man who was on his side after all. As was so clearly written in Book 1:

"At the start-of-term banquet, Harry had gotten the idea that Professor 
Snape disliked him. By the end of the first Potions lesson, he knew he'd 
been wrong. Snape didn't dislike Harry-he hated him."

and yet in the epilogue we see this:

"Albus Severus", said Harry ... "you were named for two headmasters of 
Hogwarts. One of them was a Slytherin, and he was probably the bravest man I 
ever knew."

This thought pattern of Harry hating Snape and even growing to Harry wanting 
to kill Snape remains for 6 1/2 books- so the turn around must be 
SIGNIFICANT to be believable, because the first emotion of hatred was so 
strong a theme. That transition must be smooth- it must be BELIEVABLE. Yet, 
we get something that feels shoddy and "because I told you so" and not 
"because I SHOWED you so". I'm only the reader- I want the author to SHOW me 
so. I want to feel it too! Thus, it's a big deal for me that Rowling did not 
write this transition clearly, and that the fans have to try to fill in for 
us what it is Rowling didn't write. For me, it would have been better just 
to have dropped that whole middle name and line about Snape being brave, if 
she wasn't going to write the ending so strongly to have us really feel that 
way too, by the point we read the epilogue. We should have already come to 
that conclusion as well, before the epilogue. For Pete's sake, we should be 
agreeing with her, not reading the epilogue and saying "Where in the hell 
did that come from?!? Snape the bravest man Harry ever knew!?! Surely not!"

That whole transition starts with the letter, and thus the letter becomes a 
MAJOR plot point, and not a minor plot point, because is really starts the 
climax of that story arc. If you are to be a good writer, you must have all 
your major plot points polished. Rowling, for the first time in this series, 
really drops the ball here. I think she was so used to leaving things open 
to be answered in the next book that she really forgot that she was on the 
FINAL book, and thus was the time to shift her writing style to begin the 
"wrap up", and to be as detailed as possible. We know she can, because she 
does so wonderfully in many of the hospital scenes at the end of other 
books. This book really misses that "all tidied up" feel. We shouldn't even 
have questions on major plot points. Or if you would rather, "doubts" about 
their "believability". The fact that I and other fans even have a "what the 
hell" feel about Snape suddenly being a good guy is not the fault of us 
readers- no, the fault belongs to Rowling for not having made her views 
clearer. It was her transition- her case to prove. I cannot insert words 
into the text that aren't written there.

I think this ties in with the feeling I had of "perv Snape" rather than 
brave and Dumbledore's man, Harry's protector Snape. If that transition had 
been written better, particularly about that letter, which gives the air of 
a stalker stealing what isn't his, then I would be in a position as a reader 
to nod my head with Harry, even with a tear in my eye as an apology to Snape 
post-humusly, to say "yes, Harry, you were right to name your son after 
him". As a reader, I just can't do that, because Rowling failed in giving us 
the proof in solid terms. She failed to make me FEEL a kindness for Snape. 
She still wrote in terms of letting us wonder, to suspect him, as if there 
was another book coming to explain it all- but there isn't another book 
coming- this was her book to wrap it up.

Again, it's not about the letter- it's about the letter, Snape's memories, 
maybe a pep talk with Dumbledore about it, the insight into Harry's thoughts 
of reflection to show his change in thinking- there's a lot wrong or missing 
with that transition. She didn't make us feel it too, she didn't let those 
of us who thought Snape was pure evil or out for himself to really come 
around and have that change in thought with Harry, so that we could share 
his fond memory of Snape years later.

Shelley