Some thoughts on the interview - Part I
I'm splitting this up because it grew a little out of control, so you may be able to scan the numbered points and see whether each one is anything that interests you and move on if it doesn't. Even though the first part isn't about shipping, it still interested me (because honestly, I'm not all about the ships!). But if you want to get to the shippiness, then Part II is probably for you.
1. After a brief introduction about Rowling's charitable activities and recent publications, Watson starts off discussing the WB film based on Fantastic Beasts. As I suspected, Rowling deciding to work on this screenplay had nothing to do with her wanting more money and had only to do with her creative life, wanting to have New Scamander's story be what she has envisioned. That and a plot for the film evidently popped up in her head, so she spent twelve days writing a rough draft. I truly am excited about this film--if we can't have the Scottish Book yet, a Fantastic Beasts film that's actually being written by Rowling isn't a bad way to wait out the SB.
2. Watson next asks Rowling a little about her writing process, about trying to not forget pieces of inspiration, and I particularly love this bit:
Does inspiration ever strike you at really inconvenient moments? Like when you are driving the car or you are taking the children to school and you just think, "not now"?!
That is why I don't drive, I swear to God. I cannot drive. People look at me and think, 'how can you be a woman of forty-eight and not drive a car?' But I know myself and I know how detached I am from my physical surroundings.
Ha! This is SO ME. I am forty-nine and do not drive. Never have. I do commute by bicycle during good weather, and once I do believe I could have been very badly hurt by being too distracted (I lucked out), but at least on a bike, I'm the person most likely to be injured if I do something stupid; I'm not controlling a two-ton pile of metal moving at 50 mph. It's just me and my bike moving closer to 15 mph, if that. And when I'm on the bus or subway, there are numerous times when I've almost missed my stop because my mind wandered. I should probably not be at the wheel of a car!
3. Next they talk about the theatre production about Harry's early years. It could be interesting, like Roald Dahl crossed with Eva Ibbotson crossed with Annie. Only hopefully better! (Now that I've typed that, it sounds awful, and I'm sure this would probably be much better!)
4. Rowling talks about the accomplishment of writing Deathly Hallows, "wrapping up a story that had taken me through seventeen years of my life" and speculates about possibly being most proud of a book that was less high-profile. I feel like I've seen other writers say similar things. This is probably a very common feeling for a writer.
5. We're not yet at the most controversial bit but this passage about Hermione's character IS something that I do find revealing. And although I've seen a bit of this already, I think I'm starting to understand why some of it does bother me a little, and why. And it's not to do with Ron/Hermione shipping. First Rowling says this:
I know that Hermione is incredibly recognisable to a lot of readers and yet you don't see a lot of Hermiones in film or on TV except to be laughed at. I mean that the intense, clever, in some ways not terribly self-aware, girl is rarely the heroine and I really wanted her to be the heroine. She is part of me, although she is not wholly me. I think that is how I might have appeared to people when I was younger, but that is not really how I was inside.
I think she's both right and wrong about how "you don't see a lot of Hermiones in film or on TV except to be laughed at". There ARE a lot of Hermiones, but the chief purpose they serve is not to be laughed at--instead they get transformed. A Hermione character isn't permitted to remain buck-toothed and bushy-haired; she must "blossom" from an ugly duckling into a swan, whether that means the character of Hermione Granger herself* (who transformed much more in the films than in the books, but still transformed) or a character like Willow Rosenberg, going from mousy and bookish to bold magical vampire-fighter. And while a good bit of this kind of character transformation can be attributed to character growth, which in the abstract is a good thing, it has also usually meant the character growing out of being the very sort of person that real-life Hermiones identified with, the sort of person that made readers/viewers say, "Hey! That's ME!"
I think that the tendency of an author--any author--to want to transform and idealize a character who's their author-insert is understandable, but as a result, I believe that Hermione is a little bit of a blind spot for Rowling (though less of one for Watson, which is interesting, considering the job she had for ten years). Rowling doesn't seem to be quite able to see Hermione's shortcomings, and I don't think this inability was ever as clear to me in the past as it is in this interview. So that reveal is fascinating to me, though not terribly pleasing to me, if that makes any sense.
Rowling isn't perfect, but then I didn't think she was before this interview, so it's hardly like an emperor's-new-clothes scenario for me; she has simply revealed another aspect of herself, as people do throughout their lives. It's neither the end of the world nor earth-shattering; if anything, I feel that some of her treatment of Hermione in the books makes a little more sense now. The irony here is that she does label this character as someone who is 'in some ways not terribly self-aware', which is something she's also revealing here about herself: when it comes to Hermione, with whom she greatly identifies, she's not as self-aware as she might be, and as such, Hermione is her blind spot.
* And yes, with a ton of hind-sight, I am well aware of the irony here, since I did this in my first fic. Mea culpa. But, as mentioned, I'm hardly alone, and developing a self-awareness of having done this I believe has been very useful in my other writing and has helped me to avoid this in my subsequent fics and my current projects.
1. After a brief introduction about Rowling's charitable activities and recent publications, Watson starts off discussing the WB film based on Fantastic Beasts. As I suspected, Rowling deciding to work on this screenplay had nothing to do with her wanting more money and had only to do with her creative life, wanting to have New Scamander's story be what she has envisioned. That and a plot for the film evidently popped up in her head, so she spent twelve days writing a rough draft. I truly am excited about this film--if we can't have the Scottish Book yet, a Fantastic Beasts film that's actually being written by Rowling isn't a bad way to wait out the SB.
2. Watson next asks Rowling a little about her writing process, about trying to not forget pieces of inspiration, and I particularly love this bit:
Does inspiration ever strike you at really inconvenient moments? Like when you are driving the car or you are taking the children to school and you just think, "not now"?!
That is why I don't drive, I swear to God. I cannot drive. People look at me and think, 'how can you be a woman of forty-eight and not drive a car?' But I know myself and I know how detached I am from my physical surroundings.
Ha! This is SO ME. I am forty-nine and do not drive. Never have. I do commute by bicycle during good weather, and once I do believe I could have been very badly hurt by being too distracted (I lucked out), but at least on a bike, I'm the person most likely to be injured if I do something stupid; I'm not controlling a two-ton pile of metal moving at 50 mph. It's just me and my bike moving closer to 15 mph, if that. And when I'm on the bus or subway, there are numerous times when I've almost missed my stop because my mind wandered. I should probably not be at the wheel of a car!
3. Next they talk about the theatre production about Harry's early years. It could be interesting, like Roald Dahl crossed with Eva Ibbotson crossed with Annie. Only hopefully better! (Now that I've typed that, it sounds awful, and I'm sure this would probably be much better!)
4. Rowling talks about the accomplishment of writing Deathly Hallows, "wrapping up a story that had taken me through seventeen years of my life" and speculates about possibly being most proud of a book that was less high-profile. I feel like I've seen other writers say similar things. This is probably a very common feeling for a writer.
5. We're not yet at the most controversial bit but this passage about Hermione's character IS something that I do find revealing. And although I've seen a bit of this already, I think I'm starting to understand why some of it does bother me a little, and why. And it's not to do with Ron/Hermione shipping. First Rowling says this:
I know that Hermione is incredibly recognisable to a lot of readers and yet you don't see a lot of Hermiones in film or on TV except to be laughed at. I mean that the intense, clever, in some ways not terribly self-aware, girl is rarely the heroine and I really wanted her to be the heroine. She is part of me, although she is not wholly me. I think that is how I might have appeared to people when I was younger, but that is not really how I was inside.
I think she's both right and wrong about how "you don't see a lot of Hermiones in film or on TV except to be laughed at". There ARE a lot of Hermiones, but the chief purpose they serve is not to be laughed at--instead they get transformed. A Hermione character isn't permitted to remain buck-toothed and bushy-haired; she must "blossom" from an ugly duckling into a swan, whether that means the character of Hermione Granger herself* (who transformed much more in the films than in the books, but still transformed) or a character like Willow Rosenberg, going from mousy and bookish to bold magical vampire-fighter. And while a good bit of this kind of character transformation can be attributed to character growth, which in the abstract is a good thing, it has also usually meant the character growing out of being the very sort of person that real-life Hermiones identified with, the sort of person that made readers/viewers say, "Hey! That's ME!"
I think that the tendency of an author--any author--to want to transform and idealize a character who's their author-insert is understandable, but as a result, I believe that Hermione is a little bit of a blind spot for Rowling (though less of one for Watson, which is interesting, considering the job she had for ten years). Rowling doesn't seem to be quite able to see Hermione's shortcomings, and I don't think this inability was ever as clear to me in the past as it is in this interview. So that reveal is fascinating to me, though not terribly pleasing to me, if that makes any sense.
Rowling isn't perfect, but then I didn't think she was before this interview, so it's hardly like an emperor's-new-clothes scenario for me; she has simply revealed another aspect of herself, as people do throughout their lives. It's neither the end of the world nor earth-shattering; if anything, I feel that some of her treatment of Hermione in the books makes a little more sense now. The irony here is that she does label this character as someone who is 'in some ways not terribly self-aware', which is something she's also revealing here about herself: when it comes to Hermione, with whom she greatly identifies, she's not as self-aware as she might be, and as such, Hermione is her blind spot.
* And yes, with a ton of hind-sight, I am well aware of the irony here, since I did this in my first fic. Mea culpa. But, as mentioned, I'm hardly alone, and developing a self-awareness of having done this I believe has been very useful in my other writing and has helped me to avoid this in my subsequent fics and my current projects.