Further thoughts

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...>  
wrote:
 > I think you're right there. JKR seems to leave the details to
 > labor over during the writing of each book. The fact that she
 > continues to introduce important characters and plot concepts this
 > late in the game makes it impossible not to shunt previous
 > characters and plots to the background (or out of the books). Plus
 > all the comments about the first thing she plans to do is edit the
 > series!
 >
 > I've been reading old interviews, 97-98, and was struck by the fact
 > that even after COS, there was no mention of the plot. I'm curious
 > to see if the questions started in 1999, after POA. Deconstructing
 > the plot was mostly a fandom phenomenon, right?
snip

A few days late with this one - the Fourth Test intervened and  
nothing was going to drag me away from that. Commiserations to any  
lurking Aussies - the idea of using neutral umpires hasn't really  
worked. I can't see that Shepherd or Willey would have made some of  
those decisions, even though they are Brits.

Back to business.
Highly likely.
Fans are pretty good at jumping to conclusions -- both internally to  
the plot and in the broader take on HP. After all the opinions  
offered over the years about literary influences it was quite  
surprising that in her latest big interview it was pointed out that  
she'd never finished LoTR nor the Narnia books - in fact she seems to  
have an antipathy towards the latter. Not only is it unlikely that  
she'll follow where others have already trod, it seems this is a
deliberate choice - she wants to "break the genre".

I'm all for that. Fantasy has never figured much in my choice of  
reading, or not after I'd reached the age of having to face cold  
steel in the mornings. (Mind you, that was abandoned once the whisker  
production reached a density that was sufficient to allow for the  
growth of a respectable beard. Ten minutes scraping every morning -  
about 3 months over a lifetime - and there are better things to do  
with that time than gaze bleary eyed into a mirror while blood drips  
into the basin. A bit more zizz in your scratcher, for a  start. Life  
is mostly about getting your priorities right.)

Whatever.
Fantasy is a genre where all too often stereotypes cover the pages  
like a cheap suit. Plots are limited, too - baddies threaten the  
world, goodies band together, and after distressing (but entirely  
predictable) reverses  eventually cast down the maleficent monsters.  
Ho hum. Many of the writers try to make up for this ineluctable theme  
by introducing one or more substantial sub-plots.  Even here the  
choice is limited and invariably involves the hero(s) in pain,  
suffering or misery so dire that it's difficult to keep from laughing  
out loud. Then, in a desperate attempt to elicit engagement by the  
reader their leading character is written into a situation so  
impossibly terminal that it requires the intervention/introduction of  
a hitherto unknown (to the reader) magical device or bit of magic to  
enable them to survive to the climax of the book or books. Usually  
It's a trilogy - never in the field of imaginary conflict is so much  
written containing so very, very little so often.

Jo does break the genre - sort of. And too often for comfort.
Instead of "Ah! Only the Widget of Wonder can save me!" resulting in   
a 'with one bound our hero was free' type-scenario, what we get  
instead is what appears to be a credible bit of magical usage which  
falls apart later, or seems to. Certainly there are occasions where  
it isn't applied or doesn't work where one would expect it to, or an  
explanation doesn't quite hack it. (See below.)


 > During the interviews this time around, it really struck me there
 > can be a disconnect between the hints JKR thinks she's giving and
 > what fans may hear. Like in the World Book Day chat:
 >
 > Q: "What happened to Wormtail?"
 > JK Rowling replies -> "You'll find out in book six."
 >
 > Technically JKR was entirely accurate in her answer. We did find out
 > Wormtail was alive, and staying at Snape's (during the school year
 > too?) and doing...something (spying on him?). I expected a pretty
 > complete explanation of Wormtail's activities in Book 6 though, and
 > obviously read more into the answer than JKR meant.
 >



That editing is gonna be necessary, I think.
It's not the first time that (in the eyes of the readers) Jo's  
promise of more information hasn't been fulfilled. If you remember,  
Book 5 was going to give us important background on Lily - yet all we  
had was one measly memory from Sevvy.

The situation with Peter is somewhat worse - round about Christmas a  
question re: Peter's whereabouts was in the FAQ ballot, didn't win,  
but Jo said the answer was interesting. Somehow I'd feel happier if  
we had a few international observers to monitor these count these  
ballot counts .... not that I'm casting aspersions, but it would  
remove a few niggling suspicions that the question that wins is the  
one Jo wants to answer.

Even the assumption that Peter has spent the last year at Spinner's  
End engaged in a little light dusting and raising a shine on Sevvy's  
tancrements is a bit iffy - the place is described "as if it hadn't  
been occupied for some time" or some such words. In other words even  
if by some chance that question had won the poll we'd still have  
gained bugger all.

Admittedly someone who has all the answers cribbed on their shirt  
cuff has a very different perspective on what is or is not important  
- something denied to us poor devils groping around in the dark.  
Allowing for that - and this is to be whispered down a well at  
midnight in case innocent ears are abroad - there are some dodgy bits  
in the HP plot-lines. Mostly they're easy to slide over, usually it  
involves a bit of business explaining what's happening or why. Hardly  
earth-shattering stuff, but once you notice them they rankle.  
Irritating. Little gristly bits that take some swallowing, plot  
devices that either contradict canon or fall as flat as a lead  
souffle occur on average once a book by my reckoning.

The recent discussion on the ability of the Ministry to monitor  
spells is an example of the sort of thing I'm on about. When it turns  
up in CoS it seems quite reasonable - until the number of times it  
doesn't happen in response to spells in and around Privet Drive start  
to pile up. There's Dung apparating almost outside the door;  there's  
the members of the Order splashing spells all over the place in OoP;   
there's DD conjuring drinks in HBP. Hmm. Can it be that the author  
ignores the rules when it suits her purposes?
Surely not.

One thing's for sure. There's something  wrong when fans have to  
invent extra-canon magic in an attempt to explain away the  
inconsistencies - if indeed it turns out that there is an  
inconsistency. (Shielding spells and the like - actually they're  
probably counter-canon; DD whitters on in the Cave about magic always  
leaving traces - or is this another inconsistency? And wouldn't the  
putative Shielding spell be detected even if it successfully hid the  
spell being obscured? SFAIC fans inventing spells not in canon to  
explain away plot holes merely highlights the writer's failings.)

There's always a chance that some of the internal contradictions will  
be resolved, indeed that was what I hoped would happen - and that  
perhaps a few of them would turn out to have been clues to important  
or interesting aspects of the story, but since the publication of the  
last book I'm not so sure. It seems more likely that at the end we'll  
have a lumpy carpet under which inconvenient bits of canon have been  
hastily swept -  and it'll need a bit of nifty editing to flatten out  
the unsightly bulges.

PS/SS - that damn Mirror. According to DD only someone who wanted
to find the Stone but not use it could see it in the Mirror. Yet  
Quirrell!Mort
states "I see myself handing it to my Master." Not use - give it away,
presumably exactly what Harry was intending to do in giving it to DD.
Yet Harry can see it and Quirrell can't. Bollocks.

CoS - Dobby. He zips round the countryside like he's got a season  
ticket -
yet House Elves can only do what their masters instruct them to do.
Lucius ain't Sirius and Dobby ain't Kreacher; no way is Malfoy going to
issue a succession of stupidly ambiguous orders to his House Elf -  
and at such convenient times, too.
The whole "Dobby is free!" palaver is damn dodgy too. Deus ex machina  
in the form of a sock. No thank you. 3/10. Must do better.
I had great hopes that a Dobby thread was going to be critically  
important somewhere along the line, and that these 'lapses' would  
have meaning. Still possible, but expectations are fading.

PoA. Did a few posts on this one - Sirius. His escape from Azkaban has
more holes than last years exports of Swiss cheese.

GoF - the 'magical contract' - it's not credible or logical that one  
can be
bound by a personal contract that one
a) never knew about, and
b) never agreed too.
Never believed that DD wouldn't suss Crouch!Moody as a fake. They've  
known each other for years, shared experiences etc. Crouch!Moody  
might fool a casual acquaintance but never someone who really knows him.
And why did none of the competitors try "Accio egg!" in the first  
task? KISS.

And in the latest we have Patronus-producing Tonks. In her interview  
Jo strongly hints that 'emotional' distress is the cause of the  
change of form. This I would consider a major cheat given the mental  
torture that some characters have been through in the books without  
the slightest hint of it having an effect on magical powers or  
abilities. If it did turn out this way IMO it'd be a plot perversion  
merely to introduce an unnecessary and yuck-inducing love-interest in  
a way that wouldn't pass muster at Mills and Boon.
Then there's the Hosscuts. Those could go horribly wrong so far as  
internal logical consistency is concerned. Need more info to reach  
final conclusions, but it wouldn't be surprising to see a few more  
bulges in that carpet.

No doubt others have passages/plot devices/dialogue where they wince
and squint sideways at the page. I've kept hoping that at least some of
these were part of a cunning plan that would be revealed in due  
course, but
it's never happened. Now I just assume it's careless writing or she just
got stuck. Depressing. It does take the gilt off the gingerbread,  
more so since it was the plotting in HP that first attracted my  
interest. Not much bothered by who wins, who dies - Hairy MacBoons  
could end up ruling the earth for all I care, just so long as Jo  
doesn't cut corners getting there. For all that I enjoyed HBP there  
do seem to be some rickety bits  becoming evident in the overall  
construction.

The proof of the pudding will be in book 7.
Dunno  about you, but I'm not feeling super-confident.

Kneasy