JKR's Opinion

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 179866

---  "Carol" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
>
> Betsy Hp wrote:
> > Actually, JKR's opinion count's the *least* in my opinion. 
> > Because she's the one trying to tell us something. ...
> > 
> > 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,...
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> Authorial intention is problematic for a number of reasons,
> ... 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. 
> 
> ...
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, an author's intentions matter not 
> at all. What matters is the book itself, the words on the 
> age, 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.
> 

bboyminn:

I agree with Carol, though hopefully I can add more than that.

I think JKR responds in two ways, one as an author and
creator, and the other is as a fan. JKR say that she see
Dumbledore as gay, but that doesn't make him so. She is 
making a fan interpretation based on her knowledge of 
Dumbledore which may not necessarily include intimate details
of personal encounters. 

I think we are free to disagree with her. We are free to see
Dumbledore as momentarily smitten, or as a confuse adolescent,
or as a flaming queen as the evidence moves us. 

Until such time as JKR relates Dumbledore's 'gay' experiences
in formal written form, I think her statements are her
interpretations as an outside observer, not her statements
of absolute fact as the creator of these characters.

She isn't dictating that Dumbledore is gay, she is simply
holding firmly to her view that he is. We are certainly free
to interpret what is written in a number of different ways.

> Carol continues:
>
> At any rate, JKR clearly *intended* to make Ginny spunky, 
> funny, pretty, brave, and powerful, a worthy future wife 
> for her hero. ...

bboyminn:

We are all free to interpret how well JKR conveyed her intent,
and to even contradict her stated intent. For me, I liked 
Ginny and did see her as a strong woman who could handle
the pressures that were sure to plague Harry for the rest of
his life. She isn't a girly-girl, she is strong and independent,
and able to speak frankly when the situation calls for it,
but also feminine enough to offer Harry comfort when that is 
called for.

In short, for me Ginny worked. For other, she didn't. As you
said, or implied, the author puts her intent into her work
from that point on we are each free to determine for ourselves
whether the author succeeded. 

In a sense, I am saying that the author put one thing in, but
we, as many many readers, are each free to take out individual
interpretations. One source rightly yields many many personal
outcomes. 

Just a thought.

Steve/bboyminn