A Look Back was Re: 'Clue to his vulnerability' (Coming to a conclusion )

[potioncat]

Kathy W:
Whether it works or not, the best thing to do seemed to be to respond 
to all the posts in one reply. Here we go:

Post 3285 "Parker Brown Nesbit"  wrote: 
> I'd like to know this too, Kathy.  I'm hearing a *lot* of 
dissatisfation 
> from certain quarters (I won't name names, but you know who you 
are ;) ).   
> I'm wondering then, why read the books at all, if you don't like 
them?


Potioncat:
Well, there's that, but I haven't seen any "I don't
like HP books" 
type posts here.  On one of the other sites there are a couple of 
writers who don't seem to enjoy the series at all and take great
joy 
in complaining about it.  I honestly think they're just out to
annoy 
the rest of us. 

What I've seen both here and at TOL is a growing dissatisfaction
with 
the books.  This is from individuals who have spent a great deal of 
thought and time writing posts about HP and Rowling; who have spent 
even more time behind the scenes supporting the lists. The 
disillusionment is real. I was wondering why. Has something changed; 
was something promised and not delivered? I'm not asking 
sarcastically.



In Post 3286 Lyn wrote:
> Do you really think that expressing dissatisfaction with some, 
maybe even many, aspects 
> of an author's work means one doesn't like "the books at all"? Is 
it required to see the 
> works exactly as the author envisions them (or in alignment with 
the majority of fans) in 
> order to appreciate the story within. And might you not entertain 
the idea that one might 
> like some books in a series, or some characters, or some literary 
contrivances, or some 
subplots, or some phrasing but find fault with others.

Potioncat:
Oh, no, of course not. And that wasn't why I was asking. In spite
of 
having 6 books out, JKR is really a new writer. In a way she happens 
to have one very long book.  I would expect that had she written one 
book about a boy wizard and then a different book about something 
else, even something different within her Potterverse, that the books 
and her style would have changed and grown more than they have. One 
of my criticisms is that she fleshed out her minor characters too 
well. Marc Evans didn't need a name. Look at all the trouble it 
caused! 

It's not the posts about what didn't work, or concerns about
plot 
twists or lack of them that I'm asking about. That sort of
discussion 
can be lots of fun.


In Post 3292 Kneasy wrote:
>  
> For sure it wasn't because I'm enamoured of tales of adolescents 
waving 
> bits of wood around. Nor was it an addiction to the fantasy genre 
per se.
> The fascinating aspect of HP was that it was a work in progress, 
and a work
> that looked detailed and complicated, that it was unfinished, thus 
offering 
> an opportunity to let my imagination off the leash. If it were a 
finished work
> then I'd not be here. I'd probably read the books once and then 
leave them
> on the shelf. 
Let's face it - great literature they ain't.


Potioncat:
Agreed. This could have just been a book I read to my kids. But 
somehow the series grew on me.  And it isn't literature
. OK
it ain't 
literature. And for Heaven sakes, I could do without the snogging. 
I've got my own teenagers to worry about!

The movie serials were so much fun! For me the serials were shown on 
a local TV station's kids show. I don't remember if we saw a
new 
episode every week or every day
but it was good fun! I never
realized 
it, but we are playing Cisco Kid aren't we? And some guy who flew
a 
plane with Noah Berry
Beerey? Or was it Wallace?  For me though,
it 
never mattered if the way I played it at home was reflected in the 
next episode. If it was predictable, fine, and if it was a surprise, 
that was OK too. And when that serial was over, we kept on playing. 
That won't be so easy for the discussion groups, I guess the
fanfic 
folk can carry on.

 I've no idea what I'll do after book 7.  If it's
surprising, I might 
read through one more time to take one more look with an "all 
knowing" eye. Once the discussions are over, once there's no
more 
clues to hunt for, there won't be any reason to keep reading the 
books. But, I've never read any other set of books so many times 
before. Although, I do tend to re-read books that I enjoy.
> 
> 
Kneasy:
> 
> Meantime, I'll continue playing my imaginative games.
> Sorry if they displease you, but you can always skip over the 
Kneasy posts
> if they get unbearable. It won't hurt my feelings, honest.
> 
>

Potioncat:
Nope, I'll be reading and playing along.

In post 3295:
Sigune wrote:
> OK - I'm one of those people, and here is my HP boggart:
> 
> I was only drawn in after reading Order of the Phoenix. To be quite 
> honest, I wasn't much impressed by the preceding four - meaning 
they 
> hadn't sparked my imagination and I hadn't taken the trouble of 
> buying the books or looking into fandom, much less subscribe to 
> Potter Yahoo groups.

> 
> I'm aware of the fact that this is a very simple surface reading; 
but 
> what alarmed me about HBP is that it suddenly made this kind of 
> simple black-and-white reading and ditto ending a distinct 
> possibility. The book made me suspect I may very well have been 
> expecting far too much from JKR, and what a letdown it would be if 
> all the ambiguous material, all the little things that gave rise to 
> fabulous speculations, turned out to culminate in, "Harry was right 
> all along. He kills Snape, he kills Voldemort with the sheer purity 
> of his heart, he marries Ginny and they live happily ever after." 
> 
> Finally, HBP seems very much an unfinished book. For the one-but-
last 
> installment of a series, it has started a lot of new lines of 
inquiry. 

Potioncat:
See, this is what I meant. For you, it was expectations from OoP that 
seemed dashed in HBP. That makes sense. So, do you feel disappointed 
in the series, or just in HBP, or are you instead somewhat 
apprehensive about the next book?


And for everyone who asked:
Bloody wicked! What a bunch of codswallop! Well, it's not that I 
think there's anything "wrong" with these phrases. I just
wasn't sure 
that they were still in use. As far as wrong goes, these would 
improve my angry vocabulary. Sad to say, it's gotten salty.  But 
saying them makes me sound as if I'm trying to be British. 
Humph! 
I'm from the South. I've always been British. 

I used to say "Ashes and cinders!" or "Oh my fur and
whiskers!" 
mostly because it annoyed my kids. If I said bloody anything or 
Codswallop it would really, really annoy them
.wait, where's
the 
disadvantage in that?

Bloody wicked!

Kathy W