Epilogue (was Re: Ron and Parseltongue)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 183540

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lee Kaiwen <leekaiwen at ...> wrote:
>
> I've a nagging feeling I'm misreading you here; maybe I'm sparring with 
> windmills.

Carol responds:
Your nagging feeling is right. :-)
> 
Carol earlier:
> JKR had every right as an author to kill off characters in the way
she saw fit and to bring in the Deathly Hallows, in particular the
Elder Wand, just as we as readers have every right to wish that we
hadn't. What we can't do, however, is to judge such authorial
decisions as flaws in the books comparable to the various Flints and
inconsistencies, which *are* errors
> 
> CJ:
> If by "not comparable to" Flints, et alia, you mean "of a
qualitative difference with", I'd agree. One would certainly not want
to compare a structural flaw with a minor math error.
> 
> However -- and this is where I may be flailing at phantoms -- I read
you as saying we're not allowed to judge them as flaws. Full stop. I
think as readers we have every right to judge whether an authorial
decision as significant as the introduction of a major plot line
succeeds or fails literarily. Of course, Flints and math errors are
relatively easily 
> corrected in future editions. Structural integrity (or lack thereof) is 
> much more difficult.

Carol responds:
That's not what I meant at all, and I apologize for wording my
statement as if I were determining what anyone is "allowed" to do.
What I meant is that it's a mistake to expect the author, any author,
to meet our expectations. We quite literally *can't* expect that
because it's illogical and impossible for an author to do so even if
she wished to do so. That's very different than my arbitrarily
asserting without authority that we *may* not do so. 

I'm saying that we can't count the disappointment of our hopes and
expectations (for example, my hope that Snape would live and that his
motivation would be other than or more than love for Lily) as flaws.
By the same token, her decision to bring in the deathly hallows plot
is not, in and of itself, a flaw in the books, however much some of us
(and I include myself in that number) may wish that she had not done
so. The handling of the hallows plot itself, particularly its
complexity and confusion and unresolved questions, is another matter.
Of course, we can and (IMO) should discuss such matters as the
development of plotlines and whether, in our view, they succeeded or
failed, just as we have every right to criticize outright errors
(Flints, math errors, inconsistencies) as well as the improbabilities,
coincidences, and dei ex machinae (or whatever the plural is!) that
abound in DH.

I would be very interested, in fact, in a discussion of real or
perceived structural flaws.

On another note, I don't rank small errors in math (which we all know
that JKR is incapable of performing, even to the extent of determining
the age of a given character at a given time) on the same level as
inconsistencies, such as the handling of Unforgiveable Curses in GoF
as contrasted with their handling in DH. An author has an obligation
to check her fictional facts and get them right and to maintain a
consistent attitude toward what she presents as evil, whether it's the
WW's treatment of House Elves or Harry's sudden right to use
Unforgiveable Curses. Her failure to define Dark magic clearly and
consistently is, IMO, one such failure. Another is the inconsistent
depiction of wand properties and wand loyalties. But her choice to
kill a particular character in a particular way or to reveal only a
tantalizing glimpse of the WW in her epilogue, leaving many questions
unresolved (a *good* thing, in my view--I'd rather *not* know what
happened to every character) is her decision, which we're free to like
or dislike, but which can't objectively be called a flaw in the
construction of the book, only an authorial decision that some of us
would have preferred that she didn't make.

So, in short, my point is that our subjective likes and dislikes, our
unfulfilled hopes and thwarted expectations, while we have every right
to express them, cannot be viewed as objective flaws in the works.
Such flaws do, however, exist, and they include quantifiable errors
and verifiable inconsistencies, which, again, we have every right to
point out (or try to resolve through explanations that may or may not
convince other readers, such as Pippin's attempt to reconcile the
timing of Lily's letter to Sirius Black with the timetable we were
given for the Fidelius Charm and the betrayal by Wormtail in PoA).

Now personally, and this has nothing to do with my previous post, I
prefer to analyze the books rather than criticize them, in the sense
of finding fault. I'd rather analyze character development and
motivation or literary techniques than point out flaws. That doesn't
mean that we "can't" (or rather, *may* not) criticize the books. Of
course, we can (may). I just think that it's a good idea to
distinguish between our personal preferences, what we wish JKR had
done, especially in the last book) and actual flaws and errors in the
books (of which there are many, some minor and some not). Her
"failure" to meet our expectations (and I'm not quoting anyone here)
is not a failure at all, only an unwillingness on the part of some
readers to accept the story that she chose to tell. (Their disliking
it does not, of course, make it "bad" writing judged by objective
criteria. And even the extent to which objectively determinable flaws
mar the work is subjective.) 

At any rate, I'm certainly not trying to thwart discussion, only to
state that JKR has every right to write the book her way, even if we
don't like it. And we have every right to point out flaws (or simply
to analyze the text), but we shouldn't (IMO) hold her to unrealistic
expectations such as satisfying our own particular hopes and desires.

I'd love to hear what you have to say about structural flaws in the
plot, which I assume that you'll support with canon. I agree with you
that the deathly hallows plot could have been better handled and that
it presents certain complications that might better have been avoided.
IMO, structuring the book around the school year when HRH weren't at
Hogwarts and their isolation from the WW at large also presented
problems which JKR could have avoided either by keeping the kids at
school or shortening the time frame covered by the last book. Even
with McGuffins, erm, Horcruxes and Hallows to pursue or not pursue,
there's a lot of unfilled time that might have been avoided by
restructuring the books. IOW, I think we're in agreement here and that
you misread my post, which I admit could have been more effectively
(and less peremptorily) worded.

Carol, snipping the discussion of McGuffins, in which I think I agree
with CJ but am not entirely sure