Other New News

[Petra]

No: HPFGUIDX 178187

va32h, in #178157:
> Honestly, I don't know why so many readers absolutely MUST have 
> JKR's final word on everyone and everything.  Isn't something you 
> could imagine for a character just as "good" as what JKR made up 
> off the top of her head?

Petra:
Yes, but I already know what's already in *my* head.  I read books
(and this group) because I want to know what's in other people's
heads!  <eg>

Mike, in #178163:
> [JKR] hasn't thought out the back 
> story for the Marauders AT ALL. I mean, I already seriously doubted 
> her ability to subtract or add when it came to keeping her years 
> straight. This "news" proves that she not just bad with maths, she 
> didn't even try to use it.

Petra:
Am I the only person who doesn't care that her maths sucks? <g>

To me, all those details are fun and only gets in the way if 
they contradict each other in ways that interfere with her
theme development.  When it comes to details that really 
matters, she got most of those right.  Or maybe I'm just 
forgetful enough to miss the biggest Flints?

Aha, case in point, the original Flint matters very little, no?
I'm heartily sorry for those who found flints very distracting
but I must admit to not noticing them in my leisure/HP reading.

Hmm...I wonder if flints would be less distracting for the 
readers to come who *didn't* have to wait so long in between
the publication of the books?

Mike, #178163:
> I'll entertain possibilities in a future encyclopedia if she limits 
> it her pre-release, backstory notes.

Petra:
I beg to differ! I think the inconsistencies are as interesting
as "canon" because I'm fascinated by the process of writing.

In some ways, fleshing out a plot is like reverse engineering -
you know what you want the end result to be like but how do you
choose the many various ways of getting there?

Inconsistencies are often signs that a detail is of little
significance to the author, even if they mean a lot to *us*
during the process of trying to weed through her red herrings
to discover the real clues [aka can(n)on for theory/ships]
*before* the saga concluded.

Mike, #178163:
> But even then, I'm afraid it 
> will only show her lack of insight into her own characters. It also 
> might expose her as not as deep as we've given her credit. We may 
> well find that the parallels, motifs, allegoricals, etc. that we've 
> proffered are more than she intended.

Petra:
Here's an interesting literary dilemma - is an author only as good
as he is able to interpret his own art?  Or is she as good as the
range and depth of response to her work?  The answer to this may
in part depend on one's view of how an artist's subconscious 
contribute, no?

Petra, the insomniac
a
n  :)
 
 
 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com