This thread is a focused discussion group. Please see the first post below for the current topic and upcoming book discussions. While natter will inevitably happen, we encourage you to treat this like a virtual book club and try to keep your posts in that spirit.
By consensus, this thread is reopened specifically to discuss Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. It will be closed again once that discussion has run its course.
***SPOILER ALERT***
- **Spoilers for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows lie here. Read at your own risk***
Trudy you just reminded me of something. In one of his introductions (I think to the unabridged The Stand), Stephen King remarked that he's often asked by fans to share with them what happened to characters in his story after the story ended. King jokes, like they drop him a line every now and then to tell him what they're up to.
I actually find it a little strange when JKR answers questions about her characters outside of the books. Not that it's wrong, or that she wouldn't be the best person to know the answers to these questions. For me, however, the entire character is contained in the story and any extra-textual information, even coming from the author, is virtually meaningless to me.
Mostly, I think she's just having fun.
That's how I took it. Some details (and in hers a lot, I'm guessing) don't make the story better or more viable.
exactly. she didn't make a big deal over Cedric Diggory being black, but no one's calling her racist because she didn't make it clear in the book.
I thought it was Dean Thomas? I couldn't figure out if Blaise Zabini was a boy or a girl for a long time, though....
Dean Thomas is black. Blaise Zabini is black and male, both of which were unclear until Book 6, I think. Lee Jordan, also black.
I actually find it a little strange when JKR answers questions about her characters outside of the books. Not that it's wrong, or that she wouldn't be the best person to know the answers to these questions. For me, however, the entire character is contained in the story and any extra-textual information, even coming from the author, is virtually meaningless to me.
In theater terms, I guess we'd say she's a little more Method -- she has a whole back story (apparently boxes and boxes of it) and gets into motivations etc., You're more Practical Asthetics -- whats on the page is all that matters.
Of course, both say they're based in Stanislavksky, so what are you going to do?
I did notice that there was no one in the HP series who was gay or questioning prior to the Dumbledore reveal. While it is a YA series and is not about anyone's sexuality, there was quite a bit about romantic feelings (Ron/Hermione, Harry/Cho/Jenny) and couples (the aforementioned as well as Tonks/Lupin, Charlie/Fleur, and others). I always thought it would have been quite nice to have a random kid (or even one of the main kids) who was gay w/o a big deal being made of it. To have this Dumbledore thing after the fact just feels silly to me. Either go there or don't, you know? It would have been nice for gay kids to have someone to relate to in that way and what a coup for it to have been Dumbledore!
It's like deleted scenes on a DVD, really. Nice to know, but not necessarily canon.
