[stylist] Back to the wizarding world

[Donna Hill]

Bridgit,
Yes, she admits to inconsistencies, and I personally think there are a few
woppers in the seventh book. The shorter time period for completion is an
issue, but I think more time would have improved the novels mostly by
tightening up the writing and avoiding redundancy. Somewhere, and if I ever
get my head above water I'll look for it, there is a list of some sort which
points out the mistakes she made which have been corrected in later editions
of the books. 

I view her extensive note-taking and character profiles a bit differently.
Deliberately searching for and correcting inconsistencies -- be they
time-lines, characteristics or whatever -- is ahuge part of the editing
process for any novel. Doing what she did in terms of the back stories is
more of a tool to help the author avoid  and detect such mistakes than a
cause of them. I would advise any writer of fiction to thoroughly know your
characters, plot lines and points of interaction where plotlines intersect.
I kept a thorough calendar, for instance, and it helped me spot  mistakes as
I was putting the novel together.
Donna

-----Original Message-----
From: stylist [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Bridgit
Pollpeter
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 2:57 PM
To: stylist at nfbnet.org
Subject: [stylist] Back to the wizarding world

I agree with Donna's post, but I will also add that Rowling has admitted
that due to the volume of each novel and the short time frame in which she
wrote most of the books, she certainly made mistakes, and that she could
have better edited most the books. Just for sake of this discussion, grin.

And to be Devil's Advocate for a minute, it is entirely possible to
over-look things when creating a series as large as Harry Potter. Each book
is hundred's of pages long with plots and sub-plots paralleling and weaving
together. Rowling kept extensive notes and character profiles even for the
most insignificant characters. She says she has piles and piles of
back-story that were never intended to be published but that she required to
write the books. This is a huge under-taking that, for the sake of argument,
can become burdensome and difficult to keep track.
It doesn't necessarily mean inconsistencies are inevitable, but it does make
them probable.

Donna argues a strong case, and I agree to a certain point. Rowling
certainly meant for information to be learned slowly both by characters and
readers. And as Donna points out, it wouldn't be entirely out of character
for Dumbledore to mislead or misinform to protect Harry and others.

However, you have to look at the work as a whole, each book being a piece of
the puzzle, and upon inspection, I think a case can also be made that there
are inconsistencies. You have to consider how we learn information and who
provides that information. Is it a character? Is it author interjection? Is
that source reliable? And does it add up to how information is disseminated
and dissected throughout each book. Based on this, I'm not entirely
convinced about the cloak theory, but Donna does present a strong persuasive
argument.

As to inconsistencies within Rowling's work, this is a widely accepted
opinion including the author herself, which is something to consider when
discussing the book.

Great discussion because topics like this make us learn to read carefully,
paying attention to those elements that can later help us as writers.

Bridgit
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 16:26:16 -0400
From: "Donna Hill" <penatwork at epix.net>
To: "'Writer's Division Mailing List'" <stylist at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [stylist] Back to the Wizarding World
Message-ID: <6E6E709411FA4D7CB50795F894B5E711 at OwnerHP>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"


Phyllis,
Yes, indeed, Harry's cloak was a quantum leap more powerful than the average
(though still quite rare) invisibility cloak. Harry's cloak was not "an"
invisibility cloak, it was "the" invisibility cloak -- the one and only
invisibility cloak that was part of the Deathly Hallows, the three objects
with superior powers handed down through the generations.
But Dumbledore was in possession of the cloak since borrowing it from
Harry's father shortly before his death. He had spent decades searching for
and dreaming of the Deathly Hallows, and he knew what it was.

Of course, Hermione could be lying or have misremembered, but I think either
of those possibilities is unlikely. I think we can at least trust that
Dumbledore said exactly what Hermione says he said.  The question
becomes: was Dumbledore being totally truthful with them? I think the answer
to this question has to be "No." 

So, why would Dumbledore tell them that the Dementors could see through
invisibility cloaks? Was he speaking specifically of Harry's cloak or of the
more common and less powerful cloaks? He does use the plural "cloaks." 

The mere use of the plural in this case points to evasiveness on
Dumbledore's part. After all, there's only one like Harry's, so making it
plural insinuates that he is referring at least in part to the lesser
cloaks.

Was this evasiveness an attempt by Dumbledore to shield Harry from the truth
about his cloak?   This would go along with Dumbledore's self-proclaimed
mistake -- his tendency throughout Harry's younger years at Hogwarts of
trying to conceal from him the truth about what happened the night his
parents died -- the truth about his true identity and destiny. Since
Dumbledore doesn't come clean with Harry until the end of book 5 after
Sirius dies, it can be assumed that this evasiveness is in effect in book 3.

But, the case could be made that deliberately warning Harry about the
Dementors was to make him even more careful than he needed to be. The
thinking would be something like a parent knowing that most of the time,
their child isn't going to get hit by a car when crossing the street.
But, the consequences of that once-in-a-while occurrence are too
devastating, so the parent warns the kid that they could be hit by a car,
never mentioning that it is statistically more likely that the driver will
swerve and just give the kid a good scare.

Personally, I lean toward both explanations and one more. Telling Harry a
half-truth fits well with Dumbledore's character 


_______________________________________________
Writers Division web site
http://www.writers-division.net/
stylist mailing list
stylist at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
stylist:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/penatwork%40epix.net