Manifesto?

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" <nrenka at y...> wrote:
> 
> 1.  Disquiet with JKR's moral universe.  Frequently coupled with 
> laments about Slytherin House.  A result of wildly disjunct horizons 
> and a disinclination to want to get in and understand what the text 
> is doing, even if it's not something you like.
>

Kneasy:
Who gets to decide what is or isn't moral?
Who is the arbiter? You, me or a site pseudomyn from wherever?
Is the 'internal morality' relevant or integral to the story?
And what happens when others disagree?
Would you allow others to dictate what you must think?
I sure as hell won't.
Impasse.
But not a real problem unless someone decides to force the issue.
Good manners and a sense of proportion should prevent it all
getting too fraught, though there might be a few not willing to let
things lie.

HP is "not a morality tale, but hopefully morals can be drawn from it"
thus spake the author and no doubt some will be outraged by such
a cavalier attitude. A fair warning that it's not a 'message' book.
Some may wish that it were, others accept that when they enter an
author's construct, if they can't tolerate the designated structures then
it's better to leave - otherwise it'd be a case of crying for the moon. 
We're 'table d'hote' with HP, not 'a la carte'. Not a problem for most
book lovers, it's the differing views, treatments and presentations that
are the main attractions of books anyway. 

 
> 2.  Complaints about continuity and "this doesn't make sense", raised 
> on all sides.  Not a complaint to just toss aside unless you think 
> absolutely everything in the book will prove out as meaningful.  That 
> theory doesn't have a good track record...

Kneasy:
A bit premature there, I'd have thought; the series is but 70% complete,
with most of the action and explication to come.
Or perhaps you have information that we're not privy to...

> 
> 3.  Disillusionment caused by 'rejection' by the author.  We read and 
> we project...and it can be awfully hard to toss one's cherished ideas 
> out the window after 2-3 years feeding them and calling them George.  
> See the proliferation of 'fanon' out in the wide world as the most 
> common response to when things don't go the way a fan wants them to.
> 

Kneasy:
I don't see this myself. Will you feel 'rejected' if some of the proposed 
theories are validated? I doubt it. A touch disappointed perhaps,
and of the opinion that maybe Jo could have done better, but you can't
be 'rejected' when your opinion isn't canvassed in the first place. And
herself has stated quite plainly that she's writing this for herself and
doesn't give a damn what anybody else wants. Some will find this
particularly upsetting; no only doesn't she need advice, she's not 
bothered about criticism either. Something that's close to unforgivable
for those that believe they have a 'right' to be heard -  and if necessary
mollified.

I see fanon as a healthy response and in no way an indictment of the
developing story-arc. It demonstrates that fans have imagination too.
Just because one can think of an alternative universe that does not 
constitute a rejection of the one you're in.