Canon, Fanon and Extrapolation...

[scatteredlogic]

Comments

[cavalaxis]

I have to scoff at people who tell me my characterization is "wrong" (please note big air quotes). ORLY? I'm sorry, are your initials JKR?

I received a review for Grimmauld Nocturna, an explicitly labelled horror piece, telling me that my characterization wasn't consistent. I'm sorry, wasn't consistent with what? Your characterization? JKR's Characterization? My typical characterization?

See, these are the reviews that make me crazy...

[scatteredlogic]

Yep. I'm surprised that someone would tell you that you had the characterization as inconsistent. It was perfectly consistent within the framework of the story, and considering the obsessive tendencies we know that character to have, I think it was perfectly consistent within the framework of the original works. ~nods~

[cavalaxis]

The nice thing about fandom is that we have leeway to play with the characters. I've seen everything from a doting, romantic Severus to vitriolic bastard Severus. The framework is what allows us to play. And I'm the author. I'm the one who makes those decisions.

Now if I'd written him as best buddies with Lockhart, then you can call me out on being OOC, but inconsistent? WTF?

And getting back to your point, fanon = / = canon. SRSLY.

[scatteredlogic]

Exactly! I enjoy Snape in a range of characterizations, so it seems odd to me that people limit themselves to just one.

Now if I'd written him as best buddies with Lockhart, then you can call me out on being OOC, but inconsistent? WTF?

You know, I've even seen Snape/Lockhart done well. Although, the relationship developed after the canon ended. It was in Potio by Seeker.

[cavalaxis]

I'm not sure I could handle Snape/Lockhart. And I blame that fact entirely on Kenneth Brannagh. ~shudder~

[scatteredlogic]

Oh, wow, I thought I was the only one in the HP fandom who didn't like his portrayal of Lockhart. I'm glad to know I'm not alone. ~grin~