Respect / Unforgettable moments LONG

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 180336

> Geoff:
> For me the chapters leading on from "The Forest Again" were among 
the 
> best. But a point which was totally unforgettable was that symbolic 
> moment when "a red-gold glow burst suddenly across the enchanted 
> sky above them as an edge of dazzling sun appeared over the sill of 
the 
> nearest window", the moment when "Harry... yelled his best hope to 
the 
> heavens" when Voldemort made his final throw and lost.
> (from DH, "The Flaw in the Plan", p.595 UK edition)
> 
> No pun intended, but that was sheer magic for me.
>

Alla:

Yes absolutely loved it and loved the forest. Hmmm, what else I loved 
the best in DH?

I actually really liked the scene of Ron fighting his demons to 
destroy the horcrux. I really liked the scene between Harry and 
Ginny - that gave me hope that sometimes JKR can do romantic moments, 
LOL.

I loved Andromeda and Ted tiny moments. And I absolutely loved 
Regulus' story. Just a few to mention for now.

Alla:
>
> Please cite where I said that anybody who wants to disregard
> interviews is wrong.
 Shelley:
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.

Alla:

Actually, if I am being assigned the words I never said I will  be 
doing this. It happened to me couple of times too – I was thinking 
about thread in general and replied to one person. The thing is I did 
NOT say it and it read to me as if you assigned those words to me. 

> Alla:

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

Shelley:
See the last comment.

Alla:

Yeah, see mine as well. NOWHERE in my post I said that I live by 
every word from JKR's mouth. 
Therefore I do not wish to be assigned the words that I did not say.


Shelley:
<SNIP>
> I would like to have a conversation where people aren't trying to 
ascribe 
> motives to us (you're trying to smear Rowling, or you're trying to 
drag down 
> her good name), so that there isn't this false constraint on the 
list that 
> every conversation thread must be positive or you will get jumped 
on by the 
> people who still love Rowling and feel all of her errors are just 
minor 
> things to be ignored. I wish people would get the idea that we can 
talk 
> about her errors and still love her too.

Alla:

I absolutely agree with you - motives should not be assigned to 
anybody, but do you not see that you are doing the same thing?

"will get jumped on by the people who still love Rowling and feel all 
of her errors are just minor things to be ignored"?

You just generalized massive group of people, just as Eggplant made 
massive generalizations about the other side of the argument.

Here is the deal. I love Rowling's writing, but I certainly do not 
feel that all of her faults must be ignored.

In fact, while I massively disagree with your position, I think you 
have  a right to say it.

BUT the opposite is true as well. You have a right to critique 
Rowling as much as you want to - she is a public figure, etc. But 
please do not expect that your critiques will go unchallenged 
necessarily. I am using you as generic you here. Just as you have a 
right to say anything negative about her, I have a right to challenge 
it. I have a right to challenge every single sentence if I wish to do 
so. And I have a right to do so without being told that I am jumping 
on people ( I know it was a generic comment but since I am defending 
her, I think it can apply to me) I do not jump on anybody and I do 
not go to defend her every single time. I argue, I debate, discuss, 
etc. I do not consider her to be the greatest writer ever lived 
certainly. I can name plenty of writers better than her. But I think 
she is a good writer  and not bad interviewer and yeah, so far there 
is not much in the criticism of her  here that I agree with. As I 
said I do not do it every single time, but when I choose to do so, I 
will do so as much as I feel like it. It goes both ways, you know?

And what does the fact that you still love the six books has to do 
with anything?

I totally understand that position. I challenge your critique of 
Rowling NOT the fact that you still love the six books. I do know you 
can do both.

And we can be friends and disagree too of course. Just look at 
Ceridwen's recent rant ( hi dearest). There is really  not much 
besides JKR's being a public figure and therefore open to criticism 
in her rant that I agree with . And she is one of my very best 
buddies on list and I hope always will be.
Here is one.

Ceridwen:
<SNIP>
I had an equally disturbed reaction to Rowling after finishing DH.
For six books, the Unforgivable Curses were just plain wrong. It was
even enshrined in both canon and wizarding law that using an
Unforgivable was a sure ticket to Azkaban. Yet Harry uses one, makes
a smart-mouthed quip, and... nothing. No heart searching afterwards,
no repercussions from the legal or Divine.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Yeah, not one repercussion, but also not much praise don't you think? 
Left for reader to decide, as Pippin said heeeee.
 
Ceridwen:
<SNIP>
And Snape/Lily. *eyeroll* Going on SWM from OotP, I wouldn't have
thought the two of them even knew each other outside of class. There
was no foreshadowing, in my opinion, of feelings on either side.
<SNIP>

Alla:

Heee, remember our prior DH chats? Remember? I thought before DH that 
it is definitely coming. I thought it was very nicely foreshadowed 
and I think I came to realize it very late in the game. I mean to me 
Snape's silence about Lily spoke a thousand words.


zanooda:
> Well, Alla, if ever JKR rewrites the DH and we'll get DD who is 
> really gay and the Slytherins who really return to battle, I'll 
> accept it without complaining, I promise :-). Meanwhile, with only 
> the interviews, it is a bit confusing to me. 

Alla:

But this is all in the degrees to me, I certainly wish that she would 
have been explicitly said that Dumbledore is gay in the books and if 
she wished to say it explicitly that Slytherins returned to battle. 

Oh, oh and I certainly get the confusion part ( I find being UPSET 
part very hard to comprehend, but it is not applicable to you) to a 
degree.

Because to me as I said there are hints of ambiguity in the books 
that can be interpreted as Slytherins' return and DD being gay makes 
a lot of sense to me as well.

Zanooda: 
> Imagine this: after publishing "War and Peace" Lev Tolstoy gives an 
> interview where he claims that your beloved Prince Andrey was 
really 
> gay! <SNIP>

Alla:

Yes, so? I mean it in the nicest possible way. My only reply would 
have been – yes, so?

> You'd say Tolstoy would have had (is this the right tense?) the 
right 
> to do it, and I agree with you, but I still think it would have 
been 
> unfair to make the reader (me :-) completely rethink a character 
that 
> he loves after the book is over!

Alla:

AHA. Now we are getting somewhere. Keeping in mind that I would 
prefer JKR to say explicitly in the books that DD is gay, how is it 
different from Tolstoy killing Andrey in the second draft? I mean, 
you definitely have to rethink him, you know if you just went from 
first to second draft, being new reader, I mean, if only because he 
does not give him that much religion understanding?

What is the difference besides the fact that this is an interview? If 
you are saying that the only difference is that it IS an interview, 
then there is nothing much left to say for me, really. I understand 
this position, truly – that it is not canon, that it could be 
forgotten, etc.

I understand it. But say she puts it in encyclopedia, and then it 
becomes her written word, so how is it different from what Tolstoy 
did?

Zanooda:
 It's not that I would think less of 
> Andrey, maybe I would even have more compassion for him, but I 
would 
> have to look at him differently - his actions, his words, 
everything! 
> And I already have the image of him in my head, so it becomes 
really 
> confusing - I can't completely let go of the image that I had 
before, 
> and I'm not ready to fully accept his new image, because I can't 
even 
> see it in the book!

Alla:

Well, but isn't it the case every time author makes change in  the 
character? I mean it seems to me that what you are saying that it 
would have been no problem for you had it been in the book, no?  And 
another thing I guess while I can see how Andrey's motivations could 
be looked in major different light, since he seems to be attracted to 
women, etc and his love to Natasha is one of the major storylines, I 
really do not see how it all holds water for DD. We did not read 
anything about his love life for six books. 
Nothing  whatsoever. The only companion he has a close relationship 
with is Fawkes, who is male too .

Now we know he is gay. I guess to me it is easy enough to not be 
confused, even though as I said I get confusion to a degree.

Zanooda:
<SNIP>
I thought that Prince Andrey example will 
> get to you - after all, when I was a schoolgirl, I also used to 
> looove him ... :-).

Alla:

Oh LOL. I was a school girl looooong time ago but I still adore him. 
He is an example of character how I would want to be loved, not by 
the kind of love Snape had for Lily LOL

SSSusan:
<SNIP>
So it's my place to say what I think about that if it matters
that much to me (and I've just done so :)), but Betsy and any other
member can tell us what s/he feels about JKR & the books as long as
nice, polite, opinion-language-laced posts with canon support are
made. That's what we do here. :) <SNIP>

Alla:

Yes. Me too.


SSSusan:
<SNIP>
And that's what I'm not liking about the
interviews. I wish she'd stick to revealing things she knows but
didn't elect to include in canon and admit things she might have
muffed or forgotten, and NOT move into "Oh, maybe I'll make something
up for that" after it's all over. That doesn't feel true to me, nor
fair even.

Alla:

Sure, I wish she would not do that part as well.


JMO,

Alla