Requiescat in Pace: Unforgivables.

[Katie]

No: HPFGUIDX 174950

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "urghiggi" <urghiggi at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katie" <anigrrrl2@> wrote:
> >
> Katie:
> > She's not Nietzche or Plato or 
> > something! She's not Saint Augustine! She's just a really good 
> > fantasy author who threw some classical and Biblical stuff in 
there 
> > for profundity...which worked. >
> 
> Julie:
<<<BIG SNIP>>> 
> Whereas ... Pullman, Tolkein, Lewis, L'Engle ... and, yeah, JKR ... 
write fantasy that, at the 
> very least, seems to want to be 'about' more. (Not in the sense 
that "hey, I'm going to set 
> out to write fantasy that's deliberately crafted to be didactic" 
but rather "hey, this is the 
> kind of story/subject matter I'm interested in as an author.")
> 
> What JKR is interested in, apparently, is an exploration of some 
pretty heavy stuff.
> 
> Julie H, chicago
>
***Katie:
Well, I'm interested in all that stuff, too, but I couldn't write a 
coherent book about it. I'm not saying she sprinkled it in for 
flavor, arbitrarily. Maybe I phrased that poorly. Certainly she meant 
to put those things in there, but I see it differently.

What I really meant by that was that she put this stuff in there, but 
it was to give substance to her main theme, which was about Harry 
beating Voldemort because Harry has the ability to love. Classical 
references, mythological references, biblical references, helped to 
tell her story. They were the plate upon which she served the meal - 
which was Harry's personal story. Without the plate, your meal is on 
the floor...but you wouldn't eat the plate when you're done with your 
food. I see that she put those things in there, but I do not believe 
that was the main point.

As far as WHY she would write these books, if not to explore these 
themes...She has said many times that Harry basically hit her over 
the head. He came to her fully realized. She HAD to write his story. 
As a writer myself, I know this feeling well. Sometimes, things just 
have to be put on paper, and you don't sit down to sort out the 
complexities of the various historical or theological references that 
you're putting in there.

I was more interested in her more earthly (and I think, much better 
realized) themes of corruption of power, authority not being able to 
be trusted, friendship, loyalty, and strength of character. 

If her point was to explore thoroughly the themes of religious 
philosophy that everyone is assigning to her, in my opinion, she 
failed. However, since I don't believe that was her point, I am 
perfectly happy with the books morality. I will never see these 
as "Christian" or even "religious" books. They are books that 
incorporate spiritual themes, and that is very different. 

Also, I believe that JKR has stated that she purposefully put these 
questionable moments, like Harry's "crucio" on Carrow, to show that 
even the best of us do questionably moral things. I understand that 
people feel she didn't explain this well in the text, and that is 
certainly still arguable. However, I don't think it's arguable WHY 
she put it in, or what it meant. She told us. 

Katie, loving the books just the way they are