Themes and theories

[cubfanbudwoman]

Dave wrote:
> > My impression of JKR is that, despite the many elaborate 
> > speculations that have arisen in fandom, she just doesn't do 
> > complexity.  She also, IMO, mostly sucks at tight plot 
> > construction - POA is the least bad, and even there Sirius' 
> > actions are hard to construe.  I am strongly suspicious that 
> > Dumbledore's 'screw-ups', for example, are really JKR's screw-
> > ups - or rather, JKR's lack of concern for consistency in a 
> > magical fantasy series.
 
Naama responded: 
> I couldn't agree more. The very diversity and complexity of the 
> conspiracy theories here are an indication of the number and 
> variety of the holes that beg to be plugged. Like you, I think they 
> are simply that - holes (rather than clues). 
 

SSSusan:
I guess this puts me in a slightly different camp.  I think that JKR 
does have some problems with plot holes [some issues around the TWT 
cup, for instance, even with TT] and with [minor to me, major to 
others] inconsistencies or Flints along the lines of the number of 
students at Hogwarts, the number of teachers & just how it is they 
teach all of these students, the ages of the Weasley brothers, and 
etc.  

OTOH I also think that what JKR does exceedingly well is *layers.*  
Layers of meaning in names and words she chooses.  Layers of 
possibility in her characters and overall story.  I mean, here we 
sit, 5 books into a series, and we still can argue – quite 
reasonably, I might add – all kinds of possibilities surrounding many 
of the *major* characters.  I don't see this as a failing or as due 
to plot holes.  I see this as at least in large part deliberate on 
JKR's part.  She *is* hiding mysteries, she *is* revealing grayness 
and probably quite enjoying the arguments which arise out of said 
grayness.

Is Fudge stupid? Typical bumbling politician? Truly evil underneath a 
veneer of bumbling stupidity?  Does he know more than he lets on?

Is DD a kind, loving, wise old fart who makes mistakes now & again?  
Or is he a manipulating, cold-hearted puppetmaster?  Just how much 
does the man really know?  

Is Lupin a good-hearted, if cowardly and occasionally selfish, man?  
Or is he ESE! at the core, driven there by the prejudices of his 
world and resentments arising from them?  Are his failings something 
Herself "wants" us to forgive?  Or are they serious matters?  Or is 
it worse than most of us know, and he's actually the one behind it 
all, the great betrayer?

Is it plot holes or inconsistencies which leave all this (fairly) 
wide open?  Or is it a master of layering and precise revelation of 
select information?  I lean towards the latter.

Which is why I agreed with Nora's earlier post on JKR's supposed 
gaffe.  I don't see a reason to believe that JKR made a mistake in 
identifying her beliefs or their importance.  But the fact that, 
again, we're 5 books into the series and a reader can be atheist, 
agnostic, Hindu, Christian or wiccan and still be pleased with 
the "messages" she's sending speaks to her ability and desire to do 
what she's doing in a non-propaganda'ish way.  As Nora said, why 
expect her literary work to turn into propaganda in the end?   

It may be that, once we reach the end, we'll see *something* in the 
resolution which mirrors *something* in her Christian belief system, 
but it doesn't mean that she's going to be shouting at 
people, "See!!  It was all a Christian story after all!  Ha ha!  
Suckered you into reading it and now you've been prosletyzed to."  

Not her style, that.

No, I think there may be parallels but that the reader won't have 
reason to feel it's been propaganda.  There have been parallels 
or "borrowings" from all kinds of things in her books so far – 
folklore, mythology – but it doesn't mean that's ALL it's about or 
ALL that we'll see in the end.

Siriusly Snapey Susan, still way under the weather and so probably 
shouldn't be attempting this post, but there you have it.