Neri/OT: Intro/Theorising

[nkafkafi]

> Carolyn:
> Why Neri, I think you have Edge too. More Ouch [& inspects scars]. 
> We've talked around this one before, but perhaps you don't mind if I 
> revive it again?
> 
> Like you, I am fascinated by the mystery at the heart of the series, 
> but I think it would be fair to say you have more time for the girl 
> in the gymslip than me. Maybe that's more a matter of belief that 
> there are any supposed rules to JKR's game, than lack of interest in 
> theorising, right?

Neri:
I'm not sure if you mean to say I lack interest in theorizing, or that
I lack belief in JKR following her rules. I hereby proclaim that I'm a
rabid theorist, and I'm certain JKR follows her rules wherever it
counts. Maybe I should clarify the nature of my relationship with
Faith, since I suspect that for me she represents something slightly
different than her public image. For a scientist, one of the most
dangerous things is to fall in love with his own theories and
conceptions, so much that he can't see where they fail, or doesn't
have the heart to abandon them. Countless scientists throughout
history failed in this, and that's why we never heard about them, but
even some of the greatest have made this mistake. Einstein, for
example, wasted the last 30 years of his life on an absolutely
fruitless effort, just because he couldn't let go of his conviction
that "God doesn't play dice". In order to stay productive as a
scientist one need to learn how to be unfaithful to one's own
theories, to abandon them without looking back when they let him down,
and move on to new and better theories. This is Faith to me. She
doesn't represent anti-theorizing. She represents the ruthless natural
selection of theories. I know that the day I can convince Faith to buy
a badge, this will be the day I'll have a theory that is really worth
something. And if I can't handle rejection from Faith, I won't be able
to handle rejection from JKR too, when books 6 and 7 are out. So
instead of being faithful to this or that theory, I'm faithful to
Faith. Because she represents not only the ruthless natural selection,
but also the conviction that a true and worthwhile solution does exist.

I noticed that some months ago you had a discussion with Annemehr
about the perils of theorising, and why many of the most enthusiastic
theorists of the pre-OotP era are not very active anymore. May I
suggest that many of them fell in love with their own theories, and
didn't handle JKR's rejection in OotP very well? Perhaps they should
have had some training with Faith first. 

> Carolyn: 
> Many others here would argue that the central mystery is a mere 
> bagatelle, of passing interest compared to the 'big themes' that the 
> series (allegedly) addresses.

Neri:
Faith had never argued that. Of course she believes in the big themes,
but she ensures me that the heart-of-it-all is a mystery worthy of my
efforts. Besides, one of the main reasons I'm interested with the big
themes is that they are very handy tools for theory building and testing.
 
> Carolyn: 
> From the perspective of a paranoid conspiracy theorist, the prospect 
> of a highly conflicted ending and the confirmation of, for example, a 
> theory like ESE!Lupin is what will make the series live on for me, 
> and make me re-read long after Book 7 appears. The nearest analogy I 
> can think of is Le Carre - his unflinching observations of trust, 
> betrayal and the futility of war and international politics live on, 
> and continue to resonate precisely because of the complexity of the 
> plotting - it feels real because it is messy, uncomfortable and in 
> many ways unresolved.
> 

Neri:
To make the discussion more concrete, do you mean by this that you are
content with the way Sirius died? That you prefer this death to remain
messy, uncomfortable and unresolved? I believe I stand here with most
other members (even those who aren't Sirius fans) when expecting for
some clarification and meaning for it.

The analogy with Le Carre might be misleading. JKR may be that deep,
but that does not necessarily mean she shares the same themes and
values. There are other ways of being deep than having a big ESE. And
anyway, JKR wrote five books already. For theorizing about what will
happen in books 6 and 7, I prefer to analyze these books then rely on
analogies with Le Carre or any other author. 

> Carolyn:
> How about you? Do you chuck away thrillers and detective novels once 
> you know the ending, or are there any you revisit? What kind of 
> resolution would make JKR live on for you?
> 

Neri:
I don't chuck the really good ones, the ones that are more than mere
intellectual exercise. I reread HP many times, and not only because
the main mystery is still unresolved. Actually, many times when I just
open the book to check some detail I need for my theory, I find myself
forgetting about the detail and my theory altogether, and just reading
the book again. I don't think this will stop once I know The Big Answer.

So books 1-5 will certainly live on for me. I'm not sure what kind of
resolution I require. When I know that I'll probably be much closer to
the final theory. I do sometime doubt that in books 6 and 7 JKR will
manage to weave together all the threads she started. And then of
course Faith clubs me on the head for my lack of faith. Ouch.

Neri