Disappointment Was: Deaths in DH LONG

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 177495


> 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.

Magpie:
Well, yes. I'm sure the person is advancing it as an interpretation 
that works. I'm strictly talking about my way of reading the book and 
how many interpretations just don't ring true for me at all except as 
something written by the reader that isn't backed up in the text but 
grafted onto it. Whether it's not as silly as Harry going to Mars 
doesn't really matter. It's actually more like ESE!Lupin to me. So 
reading positive posts doesn't change my view of the texts the way 
they would if I read them and thought their interpretation worked and 
changed the way I saw it.

I mean, clearly some of the things that to me are nice but huge 
stretches work for you, but that still doesn't make them any more 
believable to me, or sound like JKR's style of writing, so they don't 
help me.

It'd be great if I thought this stuff was convincing rather than just 
eloquent, because it would put some great depth in the book. I just 
don't find the explanations that it is there convincing.  


> 
> 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.

Magpie:
And there are probably many specific arguments that you could make a 
good case were doing that as well. All negative reactions aren't 
about wanting a particular plot twist and not getting it, but some 
are, and it's probably natural that they sometimes sound like it when 
they are. In order to argue an interpretation, whether it's positive 
or negative, you have to use the text to show that it works. 

If everything's just an interpretation than Harry can be said to be 
going to Mars at the end. Anything can happen between the lines. We 
argue to try to show that one interpretation works more than 
another: "Clearly this scene shows that Hermione and Harry were in 
love with each other, not Ron and Ginny respectively!" or "Clearly 
Harry's line to Albus means that they're on the way to House Unity!" 

Alla:

> 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.

Magpie:
Obviously now that we're at the end we know it was just a 
foreshadowing of the DA. They joined all three together and left 
Slytherin out as the common enemy to bring the other three together, 
just like the Founders did. I, personally, was wrong to think that 
that song's warning and Harry's 'fat chance' about working with 
Malfoy was foreshadowing they would work together. It wasn't like 
Harry's "He would never forgive Snape!" (Harry did change how he felt 
about those people, just imo in an incredibly lame and undramatic 
way.) 

If somebody argued now that House Unity actually happened so the 
school all stood as one, then I would disagree with that 
interpretation. The earlier interpretation was predictive. It was 
about what was going to happen. When it didn't happen, I revised my 
interpretation of the earlier scene, just as, for instance, I revised 
my interpretation of the Shrieking Shack Scene and SWM.

JKR isn't a bad writer because she didn't write about House Unity. 
She could have written something else that was just as compelling or 
more so. I thought the book was disappointing on its own. I didn't 
like what she did write, so the ghost of the book that might have 
been is still hanging around.


> 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. 

Magpie:
Me too. Luckily I'm not much of a predictor so I didn't have any 
specific plot twists I wanted and didn't get--I had some general 
resolutions I expected more from, but no specific plot twists that I 
didn't get. What I did have in DH occasionally were alternatives that 
I thought up as I was reading because I found what was there was 
disappointing. Not the reaction JKR was going for from her readers, I 
know, but nothing I went in looking for, since I couldn't have even 
imagined the scenarios before I was actually reading them.

Alla:
> 
> 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.

Magpie:
No, but I think it would be perfectly reasonable to say something was 
a bad book because you thought the storyline was brought to an 
unsatisfactory conclusion. 

To use another book series for example, I think the twist at the end 
of the Dark is Rising is bad. I didn't have a specific desire for the 
series, I just didn't like that twist at the end. I don't like it 
personally, but I also just don't think it's a good idea period. It 
doesn't ruin the ending because it's not connected to what came 
before.

Alla:
> 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 had those kind of experiences too. But I've also had books that 
I read and thought the writer was just not very good in general. I 
just read one like that, in fact. There were a lot of times in DH 
that I thought aspects of the book were dreadful. I wasn't drawn into 
the book or fascinated by it. I didn't cry or get emotionally 
involved in it. I still give JKR credit for the talent she has, but I 
think my disappointment in DH went far beyond not having plot twists 
that I wanted to see happen. They were really more about not liking 
the stuff there.
> 
> 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.

Magpie:
Stories raise expectations--that's part of what they do. I expected 
Harry would kill Voldemort, that evil would be vanquished, that 
Hermione would be brainy and Ron would be snarky and Luna would be 
vague. That we'd find out what side Snape was on and the Horcruxes 
would get destroyed. Those are all things we should have been 
expecting.

If a writer raises an expectation and delivers something else and the 
thing she actually did deliver still leaves me saying, "I'm more 
interested in that other thing," that's a misstep. What I said above 
was just that I accept that JKR just didn't actually want to write 
about House Unity. So when people who claim the book worked really 
well claim that House Unity actually did happen brilliantly, it seems 
like they feel like it ought to have happened for the series to 
conclude. I think she didn't write it, period. She didn't seem to 
think it was necessary. Harry was the defender of what came before. 
It was Voldemort who had the plan for big change.

As to what it has to do with JKR as a writer, well, speaking in a 
generic term, choosing what to write about is part of being a 
storyteller, so if somebody thinks the author avoided the good stuff 
that's a criticism of her as a writer. But my problems with DH go far 
beyond "She didn't do House Unity or do something better with Draco 
Malfoy." 

I mean, when I'm criticizing the book I feel like I ought to talk 
about what's in the, not what's not in the book. Therefore not having 
House Unity actually isn't a criticism I have of the book at all. 
There was no storyline about it, so there's nothing to criticize--
Slytherin is a very different house there. My criticisms of Draco's 
storyline aren't just that he didn't do X that I imagined him doing, 
but that I thought he was all over the place with no purpose, he 
confused me and seemed pointless whenever he showed up and just 
petered out after a really good beginning in the first chapter. And 
that it was a waste of the set up in HBP, yes. That did raise my 
expectations for him to make an important choice. JKR seemed to 
instead want the point to be that he was frozen, which is her choice 
but led for me to the Malfoys being pretty boring and left me feeling 
like this coming of age series regressed.

So whatever she was trying to do with Draco in DH, I thought it was a 
weak choice or one that didn't come across to me. It did suggest to 
me some things that would have been stronger as I was reading, but 
these weren't things I went into the book with--they were made up in 
response to the disappointment I had with what I read.

-m