JKR's Opinion

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 179862

Betsy Hp wrote:
> > Actually, JKR's opinion count's the *least* in my opinion. 
Because she's the one trying to tell us something.  It's *the
reader's* call as  to whether or not she succeeded.  Like a pastry
chef may feel he has placed the most delicious cake in the world in
front of you, but it's  your taste that will be the judge.
> 
> Pippin:
> But it's not fair or useful criticism to douse the cake with catsup
and then complain that it didn't improve the taste, or insist that the
chef has made  an apple pie and as an apple pie the cake is lousy.
Like it or not, the author's intent counts for something.

Carol responds:

Authorial intention is problematic for a number of reasons, among them
that much of the writing process is unconscious, so an author is not
always aware of her own intentions, not to mention that the intentions
may change as she writes. Even if she's aware of her own intentions,
she may not have succeeded in conveying them to the reader. Stating
her intentions (as she perceives them) in an interview may or may not
"count for something." It's still up to the reader to determine
whether her intentions made it onto the page. 

Many writers *intend* to write a gripping, entertaining novel. Some
*intend* to make us laugh or cry or to keep us guessing until the
mystery is unraveled. Not all of them succeed. They *intend* to make
us care about the protagonist and his friends and to dislike his
antagonists. (I wonder, BTW, whether JKR sneakily wanted her readers
to care about Snape and Draco or whether those feelings arose despite
her intentions.) JKR *intended* for her readers to care about Harry,
for us to view him as (slightly) flawed but good ("pure," if we
believe Dumbledore). I *think* she intended for us to view Dumbledore
as wise and good despite the flaws she revealed in him in the last
book. Certainly, she intended for us to see Voldemort as evil and
deserving of his fate. She intended for us to see Ginny as Harry's
ideal wife and Ron and Hermione as made for each other. For some
readers, she succeeded in realizing all of these intentions, but for
many, she failed to realize one or more. As for themes, we can look at
her pronouncements in the interviews and judge for ourselves whether
the books convey the messages that she thinks they convey (or no moral
lesson at all, just a story, as she seems to imply elsewhere).

As far as I'm concerned, an author's intentions matter not at all.
What matters is the book itself, the words on the page, and the
reader's interpretation of them. If interpretations differ so wildly
that there's no agreement at all, then the book itself is a failure,
regardless of its author's intentions. If the interpretations are
virtually identical, it's also a failure since it has no substance
worthy of discussion.

At any rate, JKR clearly *intended* to make Ginny spunky, funny,
pretty, brave, and powerful, a worthy future wife for her hero. We
know that's what she intended because of interviews and what we're
*told* about Ginny. But what we're *shown* doesn't necessarily match
what JKR *intended* us to see. Instead, we get a sneaky little brat
who brazenly lies to her mother, whines a lot ("But I *want* to!"),
approves of Harry's use of Sectumsempra on Draco, and attacks
Zacharias Smith because he won't take Harry's word that Voldemort is
back without supporting evidence.

Harry's ideal mate? He'd be better off with Romilda Vane. Or with Cho,
anyway. At least she has a heart and cries for Cedric. Or better
still, with Luna, who is genuinely funny and good-hearted and brave.

Carol, who intends to pick out perfect Christmas gifts for everyone on
her list but fears that those intentions won't be realized because
"perfection" is in the eyes of the receiver rather than the giver