Alright everyone. It's time to leave your review of HBP. Since we've discussed all of the books, feel free to include your assessment of the entire series. Predictions of what you think will happen in HBP are, of course, encouraged.
Well, she did say she's writing to please herself, and doesn't care if she has any fans left at the end, so that cancels that concern for me.
I don't believe she ever lied, but has given "at this point" answers. There are no future-tense statements in The Interview. The closest thing to a lie would be saying that Ginny is warm and compassionate. We saw some compassion in previous books, but I saw cold and hard in HBP. I don't know that I'd call that a lie - maybe a very different opinion of what warm and compassionate looks like.
Anyway, if you are right, I'm curious what you make of her statement that Jane Austen's Emma is her "target of perfection". It's full of deceptions for characters and readers. Austen deliberately wrote so characters and readers had to draw their own conclusions, often wrongly. It's amusing when you get to the end, and go back to see how you were misled. Jo said she was writing so that you would see more each time you re-read. I take this as fair warning to expect twists and deceptions to characters and readers. If not, how else can it be taken?
But there is a big difference between Jane Austen and JK Rowling, and I'm not just talking about talent. Emma's 'deception' was encapsulated in one book, not seven. JA didn't tease her readers through interviews but let her complete work speak for itself. IF JKR is going to pull an Emma then she shouldn't have answered any shipping questions at all, or better yet, not do interviews at all.
If she has an "Emma" moment in seven that ends up pairing Harry and Hermione, she will lose all credibility, at least with me. It's bad enough what she and the interview did to part of fandom, but to lead another part on for years, thinking that the question had been answered then to say, "nope! I fooled you" would be beyond cruel. And really, to what point? To throw us off the track? To manipulate us even more? Maybe I'm clinging to the shred of respect that remains from my pre-HBP opinion of JKR, but I don't think even Her Arrogance has that in her.
Would she do it?house_elf_44September 28 2005, 17:45:44 UTC
"I love a good whodunnit and my passion is plot construction. Readers loved to be tricked, but not conned," Rowling says, warming to her theme. "The best twist ever in literature is in Jane Austen's Emma. To me she is the target of perfection at which we shoot in vain."
She thinks readers like to be tricked, so she sees this as a good thing. I can enjoy a good trick, but not this one. It's drawn out too long, and makes me feel cheated. We're left to go off too long and far in the wrong direction and then feel foolish. What's to like about that? I think you're right - if you're going to write twists, put it all in one book.
I don't see how she could have not done interviews. Even refusing to comment on the shipping would tip us off that something's up. But that would have been the kinder thing to do. We'd have all calmed down, and accepted that nothing is certain. That's what the text leaves us with. But protecting what she's up to is her number two priority, so I think she did want to make sure we're all seeing it the way she wants us to. You can't have it both ways - deliberate "you draw the conclusion" writing, and telling us which way we should have gone with that. But, she also told Katie Couric, "The world is my oyster. I can do whatever I like."
As obnoxious as that is, I do think it would be an amazing feat to have written so much without giving away what's really going on, and not slipping up about it in interviews, either. Unfortunately, her attitude in The Interview has tempered any admiration I might have had with disgrace.
I don't believe she ever lied, but has given "at this point" answers. There are no future-tense statements in The Interview. The closest thing to a lie would be saying that Ginny is warm and compassionate. We saw some compassion in previous books, but I saw cold and hard in HBP. I don't know that I'd call that a lie - maybe a very different opinion of what warm and compassionate looks like.
Anyway, if you are right, I'm curious what you make of her statement that Jane Austen's Emma is her "target of perfection". It's full of deceptions for characters and readers. Austen deliberately wrote so characters and readers had to draw their own conclusions, often wrongly. It's amusing when you get to the end, and go back to see how you were misled. Jo said she was writing so that you would see more each time you re-read. I take this as fair warning to expect twists and deceptions to characters and readers. If not, how else can it be taken?
Reply
If she has an "Emma" moment in seven that ends up pairing Harry and Hermione, she will lose all credibility, at least with me. It's bad enough what she and the interview did to part of fandom, but to lead another part on for years, thinking that the question had been answered then to say, "nope! I fooled you" would be beyond cruel. And really, to what point? To throw us off the track? To manipulate us even more? Maybe I'm clinging to the shred of respect that remains from my pre-HBP opinion of JKR, but I don't think even Her Arrogance has that in her.
Reply
She thinks readers like to be tricked, so she sees this as a good thing. I can enjoy a good trick, but not this one. It's drawn out too long, and makes me feel cheated. We're left to go off too long and far in the wrong direction and then feel foolish. What's to like about that? I think you're right - if you're going to write twists, put it all in one book.
I don't see how she could have not done interviews. Even refusing to comment on the shipping would tip us off that something's up. But that would have been the kinder thing to do. We'd have all calmed down, and accepted that nothing is certain. That's what the text leaves us with. But protecting what she's up to is her number two priority, so I think she did want to make sure we're all seeing it the way she wants us to. You can't have it both ways - deliberate "you draw the conclusion" writing, and telling us which way we should have gone with that. But, she also told Katie Couric, "The world is my oyster. I can do whatever I like."
As obnoxious as that is, I do think it would be an amazing feat to have written so much without giving away what's really going on, and not slipping up about it in interviews, either. Unfortunately, her attitude in The Interview has tempered any admiration I might have had with disgrace.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment