Manifesto?

[nrenka]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Barry Arrowsmith" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:

> 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.

Let me clarify, although this isn't my position.  This school of 
disgruntlement believes that JKR *is* sending out moral messages from 
a very strong authorial voice, and they do not like them.  
Specifically, it is considered to be a message that Gryffindor House 
is Good and Slytherin House is Entirely Bad, reinforced by her 
interviews where she's like "Draco is nasty, the Slytherin kids are 
unpleasant, who could possibly really like Snape, etc."  People who 
JKR likes, such as Hagrid, have flaws that are readily obvious to any 
reader, but she likes them and so we are supposed to regard them as 
good.  The Twins do morally heinous things, but for some reason she 
likes the little shits, so we get their excellence shoved down our 
throats.

Again, it ain't my position.  But you can see where from it comes, no?

>> 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...

Two words: Mark Evans. :)

I'm also thinking of some plot situations which can be picked apart 
at present as a little flimsy, but you are indeed-y correct that 
future information could modify things drastically.  Here's another 
example which floats around but **is not my own thinking**: the DEs 
have all sorts of various skills that we're told about, like unto 
specialties.  Why weren't any of them using them in the DoM battle?  
These guys are hardened black hats and they're just holding back on 
the kids so as not to break the shiny?  Doesn't make sense.  (Of 
course, you can reason it out so as to make sense--but the critic 
rejects the validity and/or quality of what you have to do to make it 
make sense.)
 
>> 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.

No, you can't actually be rejected, but you certainly can feel as if 
you are rejected.  The strength of reaction in the fandom has, at 
times, certainly gone past 'disappointment', particularly in the 
expression of intense personal feeling about said events.  If a fan 
has a very heavy emotional investment in a particular set of ideas 
and projections about a character (and many do), it's not easy to 
have things go the other way.

<snip>

> 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.

IMHO, some fanon arises because of a desire for things to go 
differently, and because of disgruntlement with the present story 
arc.  This is pretty clearly observable in the type of AU scenarios 
which have flourished post-OotP.  Otherwise we wouldn't have suave, 
sexy, enlightened Draco who wants Harry so badly, or a zillion 
stories where Sirius gets resurrected, or the continued writing of 
Snape as an aristocratic figure of wealth and supreme erudition.  In 
the discussion threads of what might happen next to a beloved 
character (especially Draco and/or Snape), a common refrain is "if we 
don't like it and she ruins the character, there's still always 
fanon!".  Fanon can be a great deal of fun and YMMV and go for it and 
all that, but it does frequently arise from fan dislike (and hence 
indictment of) the story arc and presentation of characters, and the 
desire to have more acceptible alternatives.  The newcomer to fanon 
characterizations often ends up looking at them and going "Where the 
hell did this come from?  Reading the same books?"

-Nora rather enjoys the comments from Iser about projection and 
failure to communicate