Disappointment Was: Deaths in DH LONG

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 177490

> Magpie:
> I could have read lealess wrong (loved the whole post) but I 
didn't 
> think s/he said that praise of DH=wish fulfillment. I thought s/he 
> meant, well, what I've seen as well, which is just to say that 
I've had 
> the experience of reading specific posts very eloquently written, 
that 
> were just completely unconvincing to me as an interpretation of 
what I 
> saw in the text. It's not praise in general that's filling in the 
> blanks etc., but I have definitely read arguments in different 
places 
> that read like the reader fulfilling their wishes, filling in the 
> blanks and writing for JKR.
<SNIP>

Alla:

I have not seen readers interpreting something that is not on the 
text and basing on them their liking of DH. Lealess ( I think) does 
not consider my reading wish fulfillment, and I do not think that 
she said praising equals wish fulfillment per ce, but I thought what 
she framed as wish fulfillment is still highly  subjective ( as all 
our interpretations) and not wish fulfillment for the most part.
 IMO of course.


Magpie:
> Sometimes different opinions read as just a different 
interpretation 
> that could be right--sometimes you can think more than one thing 
is 
> potentially true based on the information you have. But sometimes 
> things just aren't convincing to you as an interpretation 
(obviously--
> if it was just a case of all our interpretations being beautiful 
unique 
> snowflakes there'd be no point in debating or arguing and the text 
> would be close to meaningless). It's like if I took my own themes 
that 
> I would have liked to have seen, found neutral lines in the next 
that 
> kind of related to them and built whole new things out of them 
mostly 
> out of my own thoughts and words and ideas. 
> <SNIP>

Alla:

Yes, if somebody was interpreting that at the end of the DH Harry 
becomes an astronaut and flies to Marc or something like that, I 
would have certainly called it wish fulfillment. You know, take any 
absurd example of something that is not in the text and substitute 
for mine.

But if you are going to call the argument that let's say whatever 
changes in Slytherin house show the changes in the society or 
changes in Draco - you know, most hotly debated topics, I completely 
disagree then.

I would call it exactly what you said _ **unsatisfactory 
interpretation for you** - nothing more, nothing else. And I can 
totally live with that, because lots of interpretations I do not 
buy, 
but if I am saying that I see the epilogue signaling the changes in 
WW, big ones, I do not think I am engaging in wish fulfillment, I am 
interpreting the text.

Personally I do not see huge changes in the WW society as to, but I 
think the symbols are all there. I think the alchemic names 
symbolism is there, as Debbie argued once, I think the symbolism of 
Harry calling his child Severus shows really big change in Harry 
towards Snape.

It is very easy for me to buy, because Jewish tradition ( or at 
least what I was told as a child) tells us to name the kids after 
dead **loved ones**. I repeat, dead **loved ones**. I do not need to 
hear Harry saying that he loves Snape so much. The symbolism of him 
naming his child after Snape tells me that Harry is at least rather 
fond of him now.

We are NOT religious family at all, and still I am named in honor of 
my grandmother's brother ( the first letter of my name at least) and 
my brother is named in honor of our other grandmother.

So, I do not think that when I think that Harry **did** experienced 
rather big change of heart towards the greasy git, I am engaging in 
wish fulfilment. I think I am interpreting what is on the page. 
Maybe not too many sentences, but for **me** it is enough.

And again, keep in mind, I am the reader, who does not **care** if 
Harry experienced that change of heart, I am the reader who did 
**not** experienced that change of heart and rather happy that 
greasy git died and no Hogwarts kids would be subject to his wrath.

I still see Harry's change of heart and I do **not** believe that 
this is wish 
fulfillment on my behalf. I rather call it one of the sides of JKR 
gift as a story teller that she can convey so much in so few words. 
The symbolism of Harry naming his child after Snape tells me a lot, 
IMO.


Magpie:
> I'm not saying that this is what anybody is intentionally doing--
who 
> would do that? Or that anything positive reads to me like that. 
But 
> sometimes that's what it reads like. That's just what I thought of 
when 
> I read lealess' post. 

Alla:

I just do not see how we can debate anything, if we would call each 
other interpretations anything less than that - interpretations.

Because by the same token I can say that sometimes, and of course 
not always and not intentional, who would do that intentionally, 
some negative interpretations read to me as  simply 
unfulfilling expectations - NOT in the sense of expectations of the 
good story, but in a sense of expecting JKR to write particular plot 
twist and not getting it.

This is what calling being happy with DH 
and extrapolating based on what in the text as wish 
fulfillment I can compare with.

I mean, what exactly is in the text can be interpreted as House 
Unity hint? One Sorting Hat song, that just as easily can be 
interpreted as foreshadowing of DA, no? Because that interview is 
not in the book and if we are not taking what is not in the book as 
canon that interview does not exist then.

But a lot of people expected House Unity based on that **one** song. 
If you can bring me **any** other canon hints, I would like to read 
them.

Valid – sure, it is. Even I warmed up to the idea of House Unity 
after years of being on the list and reading the passionate 
arguments for it.

But the reason to say that JKR is a bad writer **because** she did 
not deliver House Unity, which we deciphered based on **one** song. 
I completely disagree.



Magpie:
> Would I read DH again cover to cover? I might if I had some reason 
to, 
> but I don't buy that I should or just didn't read the book on its 
own 
> terms. How else would I read it? Of course I had expectations--
reading 
> always involves expectations and this is a series with six 
previous 
> books. <SNIP>

Alla:

Of course not, I agree that you should not read the story if you do 
not want to 
or do not feel like it. But yeah, expectations we all have, but I do 
draw the line for myself at expecting a specific plot twist and 
judging JKR 
worth as writer based on that. Let me say again **I** draw the line 
at that, I am not saying anybody else should. I also drew the line 
at expecting JKR treat the particular character in certain way and 
not liking the book because of that. Same thing, **I** drew the line 
at that, not saying anybody else should.

We had this conversation before. Of course I had the books reading 
where I was not happy with plot twists or treatment of particular 
character, how could I not?

But I never ever would call writer a bad one because he or she say 
did not bring the storyline to the conclusion I wanted.

I usually say that this is a great book, but the book I would not 
reread, because I was not emotionally satisfied with it. I do not 
call it a bad writing. My view, nobody else has to share it.

I mentioned to you Pullman's books before, where I found the first 
and second books to be fascinating reads and was disappointed in the 
ending very much. It will never come to my mind to call Pullman bad 
writer because of that. Because I could not put the book down, such 
a grip it had on me. I was unhappy with the ending. I do not know 
what Pullman's writing skills have to do with it.

I found "Parfume" to be incredibly gross book and was literally 
disgusted after I finished it. But OMG never in my life I had to 
read the book mostly with my nose before. I think Suskind is a 
phenomenally gifted writer, just not the book that I would ever pick 
up.

The list can go on and on.

Magpie:
I've never needed to read one of them again to get close too 
> what they mean or what my reaction to it is. But I honestly think 
I 
> could have been convinced by a good story--my expectations weren't 
that 
> specific. Frankly, I think that many of them came naturally out of 
the 
> story and it's a valid to call it a flaw that they were raised and 
not 
> addressed. Not because JKR needed to address the things I wanted 
> addressed, but if she wasn't going to she would have had to give 
me 
> something equally interesting and compelling and she didn't. 
<SNIP>

Alla:

I do not know what your expectations were. You obviously mentioned 
Draco Malfoy and House unity before, besides that I have no idea. If 
you did not have specific expectations and expected good story and 
did not get, sure, totally understand. You were not convinced by a 
writing, I get it. But if you are not liking the books **only** 
because you did not get the House unity and Draco Malfoy's 
compelling resolution as it reads to you, well I understand how you 
are not emotionally satisfied with them, really. But I have **no 
idea** what this has to do with JKR worth as a writer.

And please, I am not saying that you do not like the books 
because of that or only because of that. I obviously cannot read 
your mind. The only reason I am mentioning them is because as I 
said, you mentioned those before as some of your expectations, right?

If you are telling me that those are NOT your expectations, I will 
accept it and that's it.

If they are, of course they are valid, just as I believe mine to see 
evil Snape or know more about Prank are valid, I just disagree that 
we can judge how good JKR is as a writer based on that.



Magpie:
> Sometimes reading posts where people argue unconvincingly (to me) 
that 
> these things were well-addressed make me think hey, obviously they 
> should have been solved if somebody's going to these lengths to 
solve 
> it themselves. <SNIP>

Alla:

Another explanation is of course that people are NOT solving them 
themselves, they honestly see the solutions in the text.