[HPforGrownups] Re: Now Rowling's control, was Less than 1000 posts/ some War and peace spoiler

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 180331

> Shelley:
> <SNIP>
> I'm majorly unhappy
>> with Rowling's interviews post DH. Call me wrong for wanting to be > a
>> book-only purist, but that's the only way I can live with this
> series.
>
> Alla:
>
> Please cite where I said that anybody who wants to disregard
> interviews is wrong.

Please don't do this. My post was long, and not really intended to be a 
direct comment to you, but a discussion in general. Both you and I know that 
you never said quote "anybody who wants to disregard interviews is wrong", 
so you know full well I can't site you on this. We are talking about 
Rowling's rights vs reader's rights. That Rowling has the right to control 
how her characters are percieved. My assertion is that her rights end on 
that end the moment she published the books, and they were distributed to 
the world to read. That's when the characters became the readers' to have 
and to imagine only from the words written. Some may be interested in also 
learning Rowling's views on how she imagined them to be, but she should also 
respect those that do not, especially when she keeps changing her mind in 
her interviews, making them to be rather worthless.


>
> Alla:
>> > BUT I think that JKR's version is official and she has a right to say 
>> > it.
>>
>> Shelley:
>> The only part that is official is what's in print.  <SNIP>
> Huh? Which is the
>> "official" part? You may live by every word that proceedth out of
> the mouth of Rowling, but not I.
>
> Alla:

> Please cite where I said that I live by every word that comes of
> Rowling's mouth.

Shelley:
See the last comment.

Alla:
> And the official part to me is the part where she invented the
> characters - by virtue of that I grant her the right to say anything
> she pleases whether her readers like it or not.

Shelley:
You keep talking about invention, but let's be honest- she's an author. The 
characters exist only on page. When it was taken to movies, yes they now 
exist on film. But outside of that, they are just an idea. Any rights she 
has to those characters only exist when those characters are applied to some 
medium- printed page, film, dolls or collectible items, play or live action 
recreation, but she doesn't own the movie that plays in people's heads when 
they read the series.

I already agreed with you that she has the right to SAY anything she wants, 
even if it contradicts her written story, even if it makes people respect 
her less. She's a wonderful author. I'm just saying she's a terrible 
on-the-spot interviewee.

> Shelley:
>> I still maintain that if she wants a gay Dumbledore, she's got to write 
>> one.
>> Not merely imagine that he always was. <SNIP>
>
> Alla:
>
> So tell me are you upset about any other statement in her interviews
> besides Dumbledore being gay? It seems to be the only interview you
> keep mentioning.

Shelley:
The gay Dumbledore is the most obvious one, of course- the major goof. But I 
did mention others- the changing of her mind of who Luna would marry, and 
the past one about saying that someone in the books would start to use magic 
later in life.