[HPforGrownups] Re: Portraits - Additional: Actors Playing a Role

[Kemper]

No: HPFGUIDX 165037

> > bboyminn:
> > >
> > > Owlery2003, you are taking my 'actor' analogy too
> > > literally. ... No, the'actor ' metaphor simply
> > > illustrates how a portrait can portray a character
> > > with great depth, but still not be as fully realized
> > > as therepresented person.
> > >
> > > ... <snip>
> >
>
> >
> > Carol responds:
> > But the portrait isn't *portraying* the person. He's
> > an *imprint* of the person as the person was in life,
> > just as a ghost is a (stronger) imprint of the person's
> > now departed soul.
>
> bboyminn:
>
> The 'Actor'
> Metaphor serves one purpose and one purpose only, and
> that is to illustrate how a Portraits can paradoxically
> be both deep and not deep at the same time. How it can
> so vividly portray the subject with stunning accuracy
> and yet fall apart when questioned at depth and in
> detail.
>
> The Portrait recreates the character, but does so
> within limitations; JKR has made this clear. So how
> can we model these limitation? How can we view them
> in a way that paradoxically illustrates great depth
> while at the same time clearly lacking in real
> depth. I choose to use an Actor Analogy because it
> does clearly illustrates a portrayal of great depth
> and feeling that at the same time falls short on
> details.
>
>
>
> > Carol:
> >
> > The portraits,..., are much the same. They aren't
> > acting (pretending to be someone else). Their thoughts
> > and feelings are those of the person whose "imprint"
> > they are (Phineas Nigellus's grief for his
> > great-great-grandson is not feigned even though in life
> > he never knew that great-great-grandson), ...
> >
>
> bboyminn:
>
> No they aren't acting in the traditional sense, but they
> are following a 'script', just as the Sorting Hat is
> following a script. ...
>
> The 'script' that a portrait follows is that 'imprint'
> of the subject, but it has limited ability to go
> beyond its script.
>
> You use Phineas and his grieving for Sirius as an
> example, yet how would an actor act under the same
> circumstances? Just like Phineas I would say. Again,
> the 'actor' only illustrates the paradoxical depth
> of the character. None the less, Phineas is following
> his 'Phineas script' when he reacts to Sirius's death.
> In a sense, when we (living people) react to the death
> of a loved one, we are acting out a biological script.
> I hate to reduce grieving to that level, but there is
> an element of truth in it.
>
> ...
>
> Headmaster portraits are more realized than
> general portraits because headmasters are so intimately
> connected to Hogwarts that they leave a faint AURA of
> themselves behind, and that Aura gives added intelligence
> and realization to the Head Portraits.
>
> I'm sure Dumbledore will have wisdom because that wisdom
> is in a sense part of his script; 'death is but the
> next great adventure', 'it is our choices who make us
> who we are', etc.... That wizdom still has the ability
> to come out, because in a sense it is superfical and
> philosophical. Portraits can do that. But when it comes
> to analyzing the details and reaching intelligent
> conclusions, I don't think portrait!Dumbledore will be
> much help. Yet, his philosophical observation, even if
> they don't seem so in the moment, I think can be of
> great help to Harry in the long run. In that sense, I
> think portrait Dumbledore will be of great value.
>

Kemper now:
I didn't quite know how do edit the above...
Steve, would Artificial Intelligence better describe your Actor analogy?

Take for instance IBM's Deep Blue.  It was a supercomputer in the
mid/late 90's that played chess against the world champion, Kasparov.
Kasparov beat Deep Blue in 96 in a six game series, but lost in 97.
To prepare for the 97 match, IBM programmers studied Kasparov's other
games to see his style of play.  Kasparov said the computer played
like intelligently and with creativity.

Perhaps the HeadmasterPortraits are created similarly.  The Headmaster
Office listens and watches the Headmaster.  While the Office doesn't
know what the Headmaster thinks, the Office after decades of watching
can anticipate and /program/ into the HeadmasterPortrait what the real
Headmaster will most likely say.  The longer a Headmaster is in
Office, the more accurate the Portrait is likely to respond as the
real Headmaster would.

Maybe I'm babbling...

Kemper