Maraurders/he exists

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 168357

> Neri:
> Hmmm. I've never realized that Harry's limited PoV can only err
> *against* Snape, never in his favour. Is an unreliable narrator 
only
> allowed to be unreliable in one direction? <g>


Alla:

LOL, Neri too funny. Of course he is ;)


Neri:
> In fact the SWM scene is tricking us in many different ways, 
perhaps
> not all of them technically coming under the heading of unreliable
> narrator, but if so they certainly need a term of their own. 
Perhaps
> you could supply us with the correct literary terms for the 
following
> techniques: 
> 
> 1. Describing only a single event and let the readers assume it is
> typical, faithfully represents the state of things during the whole
> five years before that. <BIG SNIP>

Alla:

I adore your posts, Neri, each and every one of them :) I am 
snipping all your other reasons for Pensieve scene to be unreliable, 
since I am in such of complete agreement with them. I actually agree 
with this one as well, but let me play a little Devil advocate here.

It can be said that no matter how important backstory is, it is 
still Harry's story and JKR indeed going to give us bits and pieces 
of Marauders and Snape, not go into every detail, etc.

Don't you think that for the purpose of judicial erm... literary 
economy those bits and pieces that JKR **is** going to give us are 
going to be reliable, since she is not going to give us very many?

I mean, what else JKR will possibly show us about Marauders? 
Hopefully, Prank. Maybe GH night. Aren't those bits and pieces too 
precious to waste them on complete misdirection?


Do you know what I am saying? With Harry JKR can afford to switch 
POV to engage in unreliability, etc, because she has so much space 
to really let us to get to know him as character, with Marauders on 
the other hand?

I mean, I answered that for myself, but I do wonder what you think :)

Thanks,

Alla, who also thinks that cutting hex could not have been stuck 
there, unless it was Sectumseptra.