[HPforGrownups] WHOSE DD is he? (Was: Re: Should JKR shut up?

[Lee Kaiwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 178691

CJ:

> When JKR says, "He is my character," she is not only wrong, she is offensive.

> Julie:
> Here I disagree, because in at least one sense--the legal sense--
 > Dumbledore IS JKR's character.

This is, of course, true. But laws regarding ownership of literary 
characters are generally limited in purvue to issues involving profit, 
as you've noted. Which is not at all what I'm addressing.

 > And I believe this is exactly what JKR is referring to, no doubt a
 > bit defensively (I would be).

This I don't quite see. She's addressing an audience of fans, of readers 
who are asking for information about the characters, not a bunch of 
literary hacks who are looking to make a profit from them. I just don't 
see the issue of legal ownership as part of the context of her comments, 
as no one is disputing that. But YMMV.

CJ:
> What her answer *should* have been was, " ... The question is not, 
 > 'Is DD gay?' but, 'Is *your* DD -- the one you created...."

Julie:
> (though I'd cut out "the one you created" bit if I was the author

Yeah, OK. That was a bit over the top, but I intended it hyperbolically 
to make the point. Change it to "co-created".

I don't dispute either JKR's legal ownership of the Potter characters 
and universe, or her legal right to say what she likes about them. I'm 
talking not about rights but about authorial responsibility and respect 
for one's readers.

Imagine I spend some time fashioning a toy. Perhaps I put a great deal 
of effort into its creation, who knows? In any case, when I've finished, 
I hand it to my daughter and say, "Here, look! Here's a toy Daddy made 
for you to enjoy. But it's my toy -- I made it, I own it -- and I say 
it's a car. Please play with it as long as you like, but you must 
imagine it's a car. You're not allowed to imagine it's a bus or a truck 
or a van, because it's my toy and I say it's not, so please don't even 
*try* to tell me it isn't or I'll get angry."

That's what I get out of her "He's my character. He is what he is" 
comments. But once again, YMMV.

 >(For instance, how many fans *didn't* accept the background
> facts about Dean Thomas's upbringing that JKR supplied 

I can only speak for myself on this when I say, "What are you talking 
about?"  :-) Seriously. Because I never pay attention to her interviews 
and I have no idea what Dean Thomas' backstory is supposed to be.

So I guess my response is I hadn't protested before for several reasons:

1. I don't follow JKR's interviews and have very little clue what she's 
ever said in any of them.

2. What (extremely!) little I *have* heard has never touched on any 
aspect of the Potter universe that I had a significant investment in. 
Dean Thomas is a case in point: assuming I *had* heard JKR's musings on 
his backstory, I would probably just have shrugged since Dean was not a 
character I had invested a great deal in.

3. JKR has never before (that I'm aware of) followed her comments up 
with "He's mine and he is what I say he is, so y'all can just go to 
h*ll!" (OK, I admit I added the southern accent for dramatic effect; but 
the rest is pretty much verbatim, right? :-) ).

4. I've never before felt as if a circle had just been circumscribed 
around my imagination. From this point forward, it will be very 
difficult to muse about anything other than a homosexual DD, at least in 
public, despite the fact that canon allows it. If somewhere in the 
future I post my speculations about, say, DD's ex-wives, I will be 
immediately inundated with "But DD's gay!" posts, re-opening this whole 
debate and causing me to slink back into my hole wishing I'd never 
mentioned it. And of course, everyone will so busy re-hashing the 
current debate that I'll never get the chance to discuss my theories 
anyway; I'll be too busy defending myself against the Gay!DD-ers.

--CJ