24hrs

[carolynwhite2]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" <kking0731 at ...> wrote:

> I'm still reeling over the nonchalant attitude of a writer, we made 
> famous, towards the 24 hour digression we all pondered in length 
> (which could have swayed the whole story when you include it in the 
> theological mix to determine the plausible outcome). 
> 
> What ever happened to `playing fair' (that she cared so much about at 
> the beginning), or about consideration (for her fandom) if she 
> thought she hadn't been up front with information? Please don't 
> attempt to throw the dog a mere bone; I don't have that type of 
> loyalty, I prefer meat not bone.

Carolyn:
Likewise Snow. I was simply amazed at that casual comment, buried deep 
in a long and mainly frivolous interview on Leaky (which also contain 
some further insights into the making of hogboxes, again, mostly made 
up on the spot).

However, seeing the hour long documentary on UK TV at about the same 
time it was clear that she thought the clues and other trappings of 
her 'mystery' story came a very poor second to developing Harry, and 
she was genuinely puzzled at why fans were so bothered about such 
glitches. Remember the little boy called Evans, who famously had 
nothing to do with any part of the plot? She seemed to regard the 24hrs 
thing in much the same light.

Oh well. Our theories were frankly funnier and cleverer, IMNVHO.
Carolyn