Draco and Intent: Re: Snape and Harry’s Sadism (was: Lack of re-examination)

[mesmer44]

No: HPFGUIDX 186897

<horridporrid03 at ...> wrote:
>
> > >>Carol again:
> > > What the author can tell us about her book or her intentions in writing her book is only helpful to some degree with regard to specific characters and circumstances and only if the intentions are actually realized within the book itself.
> 
> > >>Steve replies:  
> > Perhaps in your opinion, which is what this actually is. In my opinion and in the opinion of those who actually have some degree of respect for what an author has to say about their work after they've completed it, what that author says about her intentions in writing her book is extremely helpful, whether or not those intentions were actually realized within the book or not. 
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> I think you're presuming a bit much here, Steve.  Nothing Carol has said implies a lack of respect for the author.  In fact, one could argue that by suggesting the author's intent will be clearly set forth within their written work (rather than erratically filled in by later interviews) Carol is showing a deep respect for the author.  She's taking their work seriously and presuming that the author took their work seriously, as well.
> 
> I myself do enjoy hearing an author's intent (unless I adored the book beyond the telling and fear having it sullied by later revisionism or too strict interpretations), but if the work is any good it really should stand on its own.  If the work is any good, it should be beyond an author's need to explain.  (Huh.  That's probably why I don't like having my favorites "explained".  Interestingly, my favorite authors tend to steer their readers back to the book[s] when questioned... and wow but I'm digressing.  Sorry.)
>

Steve replies:

I never said Carol didn't respect the author, that was your presumption and subjective interpretation. Which in and of itself proves my point that most readers view what they read (whether it's a post on an online group site or a book) subjectively, according to their own agenda, and often contrary to what the writer of what is being interpreted intends. Paraphrasing what I wrote (and as I wrote it, I know my own intent and can do so)if a person respects an author's work and respects what that author has to say about their work, they are more likely to find that author's intentions helpful to them than perhaps a person who doesn't respect what that author has to say about their own work. 

Carol continues:
> > > Let's say that she intends Ginny to be Harry's ideal wife (as she does). Not every reader is going to agree with her.
> > > <snip>
> 
> > >>Steve replies:  
> > Right you are. Not every reader is going to agree with her.  And as JKoney has astutely pointed out, for very subjective agendas and as I might add, often completely silly or irrational reasons.
> > <snip>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> I think there's some conflation going on here.  First there's the question, "does JKR intend for Ginny to be Harry's ideal wife?"  I agree with Carol that it'd be an uphill battle to say this was *not* JKR's intention.  Not because of interviews where JKR stated as much, but within the books themselves, JKR makes her intention perfectly clear.  We have an ending where Harry is content, happy, feeling all is well with the world, and Ginny is his wife.  The story makes it clear that JKR sees Ginny as Harry's ideal wife, his happy ending.
> 

Steve replies:
     I agree in my own subjective POV that in this case JKR's intent is pretty obvious and is backed up by the ending of Harry being content, etc.  And I also agree w/ Carol and you that it's an uphill battle to say that this was not JKR's intention.  But some readers will still march boldly uphill to prove their own subjective POV of their own in spite of what JKR intends or what the story obviously shows us. If for example the reader doesn't like Ginny as a character, they may ignore the story and what is obvious to 99% of everyone else who reads it and try and believe that Ginny wasn't what JKR intended as an ideal wife.  Makes no sense to me, but sense doesn't always enter into the equation when we're talking about subjective pov's.

Betsy continues: 

> Second, there's the *completely* different question, "Do you, the reader, feel Ginny is Harry's ideal wife?"  This is where subjective reasons (silly or irrational ones, even! *g*) come into play.  And of course, this has nothing to do with the author at all.  *Clearly* it has nothing to do with the author.  It's asking the question of the *reader*.
> 
<SNIP>

Steve replies:
Right, as I said, that is where subjective reasons come into play.

 
> > >>Carol responds:
> > > I don't understand your point, or possibly you're misunderstanding mine. An author can and sometimes does state his or her intentions (some of them, anyway, those of which he or she is conscious), but if that intention doesn't come out in the text--if it's undetectable by most or all readers--then the intention has not been realized (in the sense of made real) by the author. <SNIP>
> 
> > >>Steve replies:
> > I understood the point Jkoney was making completely. It doesn't matter whether or not the author's intention comes out in the text. Readers are so preoccupied w/ their own subjective agendas in reading the book that you could hit the author's intentions over their head w/ a sledge hammer and they wouldn't feel it.
> > <snip>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> You're entirely wrong! :D  And I can say that because you've made the mistake of making a far too sweeping statement. (Mwahaha!)  There's no way *all* readers (your implication) are too preoccupied with "their own subjective agendas" that they miss an author's sledge hammer. jkoney is entirely wrong, too, and for the exact same reason.  The idea that the author cannot possibly make their intentions clear in the text is farcical to me.  It's basically saying a writer cannot write.
> 
> I think where you're both getting hung up is the idea that a reader must not only get the author's intentions, they need to *agree* with them.  That's never the case, of course.  Readers are allowed their opinion, though the author is allowed (also of course) to use all her powers of persuasion to sway the reader to her point of view. 
>

Steve replies: It was meant to be a sweeping statement, but you are correct in saying that my implication that "all" readers are this way was an exageration. What I meant to say was that "many" readers will miss an authors intentions, (not necessarily all).  However, I didn't say that the reader needs to agree with the authors intentions, you did.  What I said or at least meant to say was that the reader because of their own very subjective agendas may or may not see the author's intent, or if they do see or recognize the authors intent in the storyline may or may not care or agree with it. Readers's perception and reaction to an authors work is subjectively viewed whether or not in agreement w/ the author or not.

 
> > >>Steve earlier:
> > Your talking about readers who cry for hours after reading about the death of a favorite character...a favorite fictional character! They could care less why the author wrote that death scene. They could care less what the author intended for that scene. All they see is that their favorite character is dead, or that a character they hate is still alive, or some such subjective plot consideration happening.  
> > <snip>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> And you're wrong again. :)  I recently finished a book where a favorite character died and I cried.  I cared *deeply* about why the author wrote that death scene and what his intentions where in having that character die.  Did it work with the flow of the story?  Did it create a smooth ending or was it a false construct meant to just end the damn story all ready?  In this case it worked beautifully with the flow, it segued into another scene that brought the story to a satisfying close while encouraging the reader to imagine what will come after that last page is done.  And it left me deeply, deeply satisfied with the story as a whole and with the author's story-telling skill.
> 
> On the other hand, I read a story a while ago (coming soon to a theater near you and I hope to God they changed the ending) where a favorite character died at the end, and it seemed so contrived, seemed to have occurred only to add a "twist" that I *didn't* cry.  The character suddenly became an obvious construct in a fictional story, and *believe me* I wondered deeply at the author's intent. So I read where she explained her intent and it struck me as an intention to provide a twist meant to tidy up what should have stayed messy.  Which convinced me that the ending *was* contrived.
> 
> So you see, even while in tears, the author's intentions matter to me. :)  I'm just generally confident that the text itself will make those intentions clear. (If the text doesn't, it's generally a sign the author did something wrong, imo.)
> 
Steve replies:

Once again you misinterpreted what I wrote according to some subjective agenda.  I did not say that there was something amiss w/ those who cried over a scene in a book.  I said that readers who cried for HOURS over a scene in a book are probably not going to care about what the author intended for that scene. As a pschotherapist, I have my own thoughts about a reader crying for HOURS over a work of fiction, but I didn't comment on that here. I will say that I appreciate readers who have such passion for what they read that they laugh, cry and have other strong emotions while reading.  I have such emotions at times as well.  So I meant no disrespect to readers who are able to do so.  It was your misinterpretation of what I wrote that implied I did.

> > >>Steve earlier: 
> > My point is that while we may not need the author to tell us what to look for in their work, I'm going to value the authors views when offered more than I'm going to value others views based on very subjective and personal agendas.
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> Personal agendas and obviously subjective viewpoints do not make for very compelling arguments, I totally agree.  But if JKR tells me that she intended for students from Slytherin house to come back and fight in the final battle (for example), I'm going to look at the text and say, "you failed in your intentions there, I'm sorry to say."  Because there's no textual support.
<SNIP>

Steve replies:  According to my own subjective agenda w/ regard to this point, I agree with you.  However, some readers ignore what an author intended, don't care what an author intended, and even ignore what subjectively to us seems to be an obvious story line if it goes contrary to what they wanted that story line to be. People often believe what they want to believe, Betsy, according to several personal factors.  That's the main point I'm making.

> 
> Betsy Hp (who rather likes readers, for without them we'd have no books and what a hell that would be)

Steve replies:
 
And on this I totally and subjectively agree.