To the Extreme

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 164909

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Magpie" <belviso at ...> wrote:
>
> 
> Magpie:
> I've got to go with va32h on this one. However helpful this sort of
thing is 
> in science or electrical engineering, what she's describing in the
way it's 
> used to prove theories is that people start with a fantasic premise
and then 
> make canon fit it, explaining things away or re-interpreting stuff
in a way 
> that's not likely given its original context, or is barely
meaningful even 
> in this context. It would be fine to start with an idea and see if it 
> worked, but usually that's not what happens, because fiction can be 
> re-interpreted and theories can also be re-shaped to answer any
challenge.
> 

Ken:

But that is not how it works and to condemn a technique because it has
occasionally, or frequently, been misused is wrong. It is perfectly
fine to start with a fantastic premise and work backwards. When you
get to the point where you realize that Merope and Lily were not alive
at the same time you give up or try to patch up the theory. The uglier
your patch job becomes, the less likely your theory is. At some point
if the theory just can't be made to fit reality (or canon) with a
reasonably simple extension of your theory you do have to stop. *But
you save the broken pieces of your theory because they might be useful
later!* To stop before expending a reasonable effort on patching is to
risk overlooking a potential solution.

This isn't ordinary literary analysis at this point. The work is
incomplete and people are trying to guess where the author might head
next. When dealing with unknowns the scientific method is a good tool,
that is precisely what it was invented for. If you assume that nothing
will happen in DH that has not been hinted at in canon and if you
assume that the "standard" reading of canon correctly identifies all
the hints that are there you are assuming that there will be no
surprises in DH. I find that very unlikely. 

As unlikely as Merope passing her powers to Lily.

> Like, in this theory Merope was supposed to have passed her magic to
Lily 
> when she died, only the two characters weren't ever on the planet at
the 
> same time. That ought to nip the theory in the bud right there. Instead 
> Lily's mother becomes a possibility--and now the burden of proof is
shifted, 
> as if it's up to listeners to prove the theory couldn't happen
instead of 
> the theorist proving the theory did happen. The theory's just
focused on how 
> to make it (the theory) work as a story in its own right, not
looking for 
> action stuff in the story (for instance, the fact that Voldemort
says he 
> sees a physical resemblance between himself and Harry is part of the
theory 
> without explaining why having someone else's magic transferred to you 
> (somehow) would make your two sons look alike physically.
> 

But that is just part of the patch job that usually is needed to
complete any theory, or to advance it to the point where it can be
completed without the patch. You don't want to consider the
possibility that Merope could have passed her powers to Lily's mother.
By refusing to consider that possibility you throw away an entire line
of "research" without giving it proper consideration. It has never
been explained why splitting your soul makes you look snakelike. It
has never been explained how Voldemort transferred some of his power
to Harry. It has never been explained how Muggle couples occasionally
have magical children. And yet all of those are found in canon. This
fantastical theory combines some elements of all those and so it does
have some grounding in canon.

The real test of any theory is whether it allows the system under
study to be explained and whether it allows predictions to be made
that can be confirmed by observations. At this point in time all we
can do is to run thought experiments. The experimental results will
only be available with the release of DH and most of our wacky
theories will be disproven. Maybe every single one of them. It goes
with the territory. Personally I'd rather read fantastical theories
about the plot that to discuss Molly's failures as a
woman/wife/mother. But surely a list this size is big enough for all us.

If you don't enjoy this kind of speculation that is fine, I'm just
trying to help you see that some of us do enjoy it and that it isn't a
silly way to try to unravel the plot. 

Ken