Write your story the way I want to read it, or else!
Or else nothing. By the time I realize that a book really isn't what I'd have wanted to read had I known its content, I most likely would've already bought it anyway. I also doubt ranting relentlessly in my own LJ would somehow bring revenge upon the author- not that I intend to harm people for writing things I wish I did not read- just saying empty threats are rather pointless.
Anyway, to my immense honor (not) my little remark in ishtar79's 'Your worst HBP fears' thread got a mention in Fandom Rant. Waltraute says:
There wasn't so much of that, although there was a lot of complaining about the DEs being not as terrifying as they should be. I'd probably put in that category all of the comments about how obviously the series would benefit from some moral complexity (read: Draco not being evil), and how Rowling completely sucks at writing that. "...from here Rowling can use all the clichés in the world, or take this whole series to a much better place now" is pretty much 'she doesn't write what I want, and that sucks!'.
By far the best comment is, of course:
"On top of that Draco humiliation, I'd rather he be dead and therefore saved from Jo."
Save poor Draco from his creator--she doesn't understand him!
In case it isn't clear, the "best comment"(underlined) was made by me, mhahahha.
I can't reply directly to Waltraute, because that particular rant was already a week old and I don't even have a journalfren code. But I believe her view (that people who complain about how a character is treated necessarily think their creator doesn't understand them, or that people who complain about a piece of fic necessarily just want its author to write what they want to read) is common enough for me to devote an entry to.
First of all I'd like to acknowledge that when I comment on how a character is dealt with in an unfinished series I run high(er) risks of being completely 'wrong' because:
1) The author does know more about the character than I do in terms of their history, future action and any other yet unrevealed facts. Some of the 'punishments' a character receives that I consider too harsh, might not be the consquence of the crime we've already seen that character commit.
2) Partially related to 1), since the story is not completed yet, many events might take twists and turns and eventually 'make sense' in retrospect.
And let's not forget the tricky business that is authorial intent... Of course I'll never know for sure if the author is saying what I think she's saying, but since I recognize that any interpretation is subjective and hence debatable, I don't think criticizing a point that I believe the author is making is wrong in itself? Whether or not I am off-the-mark is another matter that's also subject to personal opinion.
Anyway, when I say I don't want to read about more Draco humiliation, and would rather he be dead and thusly saved from Rowling, I don't mean (as Waltraute seemed to imply)that: I know Draco isn't like what the author seems to say he is, and if she doesn't treat him the way I think he deserves to be treated, then I don't want her to even continue writing him!
While I don't know anything for sure, the impression I got out from the first five books (plus Rowling's interviews, so I guiltily admit)is that Draco's main purpose (aside from to further plots)in the series might be a walking punch bag, a convenient target for Rowling/her good characters to vent her childhood anger on/release their stress with. Of course I can also read him as a real character, when I put more emphases on a different set of facts in the books. That is why I said I wouldn't want to read more of his humiliation- not just any negative experience, any 'comeupance' he might bring on himself- because the sort he got in the previous 5 books, their excessiveness and unnecessity were what lead me to suspect his 'punch bag status', and if I'm right about this particular authorial intent, then I personally (not coming from a literary criticism angle or whatever)wish she'll have mercy and just kill him off. It's NOT about whether I 'get' Draco more than his creator does, it's whether or not I get the author's intent with his character's narrative function.
Sidetracking a bit: I asked myself if I wouldn't have minded punch bag!Draco, had I not come to like him. So I thought about the other likely punch bag candidates in the HP series who I don't really care about- the Dursleys and various other Slytherin students such as Pansy, Crabbe & Goyle- and decided I really just don't want ANY punch bag characters in a story, period. And this isn't my *expectation* of this series, just my personal preference, albeit a strong one.
Moving onto the other bit of comment Waltraute had problem with that wasn't made by me... Um, not having read the entire post Waltraute was referring to makes it impossible for me to decide if I agree with either party there... So instead of responding directly to that comment of hers(his?), I'm just gonna try to defend a reader's right to be disappointed when their reasonable expectations do not pan out in a book.
Why is it not reasonable to expect competent deatheaters, when they supposedly have been the most fearsome terrorists and aren't old nor crippled yet? Why is it not reasonable to expect moral complexity on the villain's part when all of the good guys were written as various shades of grey? Why is it not reasonable to expect characters to behave in ways consistent to how they've been written? Why is it not reasonable to expect a more two-sided, objective illustration of any issue Rowling has brought up in the books and have put a certain amount of emphasis on? I seldom come across people who seriously have expectation for things Rowling has not indirectly promised of in her own writing. Of course what constitutes such a "reasonable expectation" is yet another debatable matter, but I'm just really tired of people making any reader who dares to complain about a book out to be some sulky brats who are just disgruntled the author doesn't cater to their needs/standards.
Anyway, to my immense honor (not) my little remark in ishtar79's 'Your worst HBP fears' thread got a mention in Fandom Rant. Waltraute says:
There wasn't so much of that, although there was a lot of complaining about the DEs being not as terrifying as they should be. I'd probably put in that category all of the comments about how obviously the series would benefit from some moral complexity (read: Draco not being evil), and how Rowling completely sucks at writing that. "...from here Rowling can use all the clichés in the world, or take this whole series to a much better place now" is pretty much 'she doesn't write what I want, and that sucks!'.
By far the best comment is, of course:
"On top of that Draco humiliation, I'd rather he be dead and therefore saved from Jo."
Save poor Draco from his creator--she doesn't understand him!
In case it isn't clear, the "best comment"(underlined) was made by me, mhahahha.
I can't reply directly to Waltraute, because that particular rant was already a week old and I don't even have a journalfren code. But I believe her view (that people who complain about how a character is treated necessarily think their creator doesn't understand them, or that people who complain about a piece of fic necessarily just want its author to write what they want to read) is common enough for me to devote an entry to.
First of all I'd like to acknowledge that when I comment on how a character is dealt with in an unfinished series I run high(er) risks of being completely 'wrong' because:
1) The author does know more about the character than I do in terms of their history, future action and any other yet unrevealed facts. Some of the 'punishments' a character receives that I consider too harsh, might not be the consquence of the crime we've already seen that character commit.
2) Partially related to 1), since the story is not completed yet, many events might take twists and turns and eventually 'make sense' in retrospect.
And let's not forget the tricky business that is authorial intent... Of course I'll never know for sure if the author is saying what I think she's saying, but since I recognize that any interpretation is subjective and hence debatable, I don't think criticizing a point that I believe the author is making is wrong in itself? Whether or not I am off-the-mark is another matter that's also subject to personal opinion.
Anyway, when I say I don't want to read about more Draco humiliation, and would rather he be dead and thusly saved from Rowling, I don't mean (as Waltraute seemed to imply)that: I know Draco isn't like what the author seems to say he is, and if she doesn't treat him the way I think he deserves to be treated, then I don't want her to even continue writing him!
While I don't know anything for sure, the impression I got out from the first five books (plus Rowling's interviews, so I guiltily admit)is that Draco's main purpose (aside from to further plots)in the series might be a walking punch bag, a convenient target for Rowling/her good characters to vent her childhood anger on/release their stress with. Of course I can also read him as a real character, when I put more emphases on a different set of facts in the books. That is why I said I wouldn't want to read more of his humiliation- not just any negative experience, any 'comeupance' he might bring on himself- because the sort he got in the previous 5 books, their excessiveness and unnecessity were what lead me to suspect his 'punch bag status', and if I'm right about this particular authorial intent, then I personally (not coming from a literary criticism angle or whatever)wish she'll have mercy and just kill him off. It's NOT about whether I 'get' Draco more than his creator does, it's whether or not I get the author's intent with his character's narrative function.
Sidetracking a bit: I asked myself if I wouldn't have minded punch bag!Draco, had I not come to like him. So I thought about the other likely punch bag candidates in the HP series who I don't really care about- the Dursleys and various other Slytherin students such as Pansy, Crabbe & Goyle- and decided I really just don't want ANY punch bag characters in a story, period. And this isn't my *expectation* of this series, just my personal preference, albeit a strong one.
Moving onto the other bit of comment Waltraute had problem with that wasn't made by me... Um, not having read the entire post Waltraute was referring to makes it impossible for me to decide if I agree with either party there... So instead of responding directly to that comment of hers(his?), I'm just gonna try to defend a reader's right to be disappointed when their reasonable expectations do not pan out in a book.
Why is it not reasonable to expect competent deatheaters, when they supposedly have been the most fearsome terrorists and aren't old nor crippled yet? Why is it not reasonable to expect moral complexity on the villain's part when all of the good guys were written as various shades of grey? Why is it not reasonable to expect characters to behave in ways consistent to how they've been written? Why is it not reasonable to expect a more two-sided, objective illustration of any issue Rowling has brought up in the books and have put a certain amount of emphasis on? I seldom come across people who seriously have expectation for things Rowling has not indirectly promised of in her own writing. Of course what constitutes such a "reasonable expectation" is yet another debatable matter, but I'm just really tired of people making any reader who dares to complain about a book out to be some sulky brats who are just disgruntled the author doesn't cater to their needs/standards.