Shiri2007-10-26 00:48:36
QUOTE(mitbulls @ Oct 25 2007, 07:56 PM) 453338
There is a reason that very few authors ever release a prequel that includes the same characters - in fact, I can't think of any off the top of my head. In some cases, it could be done (of done very carefully), but only if everything is done extremely carefully. Making off-hand comments which change the image of a character does not really fall into this category.
...what!? This happens ALL THE TIME. Random, off-the-top-of-my-head example: Anakin Skywalker much?
QUOTE(Derian)
I suppose this is the part I disagree with. The author is there solely to serve their audience. You will probably notice that people with very weak imaginations rarely read fantasy or fiction books. Why? Because everyone likes to imagine the world they are reading about. The author is simply a vessel to make that happen. You can say it's their cannon, and I suppose I agree with that much. The point is that the canon should be as small as possible while still providing structure and framework for the story. Expanding the canon simply for the sake of imposition is counter-productive.
The author is there to serve their audience from a pragmatic perspective (if they don't, they don't sell any books) but that doesn't mean they don't get to decide on their canon for the sake of their vision or internal consistency. If they want to do things differently because of an Estarra-like love of their world, that's their prerogative.
You also gloss over this "imagination" business too easily. When it comes to visualising something someone else has written or described, my imagination is very vivid, and I have no problem enjoying well-written books and text games as immersive worlds for that reason. But I have next to no creativity of my own. I am not bothered by an author expanding on canon because I rarely assume too much, heh.
QUOTE
Simple experience. As I said above, people without imaginations don't get into fantasy. We all read it so that we can imagine, not so that the author can tell us everything. Movies are rarely as widely-acclaimed as their book counterparts if the book comes out first, simply because the movie doesn't match what people imagined. Let's think about that for a minute - what would have happened if they had decided to include this little tidbit about Dumbledore and his interest in a female in the movie. Would we all now be talking about how stupid the movie was because it broke canon? Or would there then be two different canons? Surely the author would be right, and we would all hate the movie for not following...right?
QUOTE
Sure, it doesn't contradict anything directly from the books. Neither would several of my ideas or suggestions. The fact that something doesn't contradict does not mean that it is true. What matters is whether it is central and important to the story, and whether there are indications in the story toward that point. Few people would have seriously supposed that Dumbledore was gay before this announcement, so there clearly isn't a strong indication there. What people are now doing is taking the conclusion that she announced, then working backwards to search specifically for indications that it might be true.
What matters is if the author feels it's central and important to the story. Obviously J.K thinks it does because "love was great downfall", presumably not getting involved later in life, etc. etc. Obviously other people think it's important because otherwise they wouldn't be ranting about evil homosexual heresy in children's books. I don't think it's a key point, but apart from Draco's shellfish allergy, nothing quite so irrelevant was discussed, and even if it isn't critical to the story it seems to be important to people's interpretation of it - especially since she seems to see the books as a "prolonged argument for tolerance."
As for taking the conclusion that she announced, then working backwards...well, yes, that seems like what's happening, but so what? The indicators still seem to be there, and there aren't any counter-indicators. The fact that we didn't guess it beforehand doesn't make it true or inconsistent, especially when you take into account what Saran observed: most people expect others to be straight by default, so Dumbledore's lack of sexuality never really fazed anyone.
