![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This may be wanky, but I don't really care. This is something that has been at the back of my mind for quite a while now and I've seen it come up a lot since the release of HBP.
There seems to be a misconception among many members of this fandom. Namely, that JKR knows all about the ship debates and the various factions, that she knows and identifies H/Hr shippers (and R/Hr and H/G shippers, for that matter) as more than just a handful of fans - a significant subset of the readership of her books which she must worry herself with trying to placate.
Judging from what little she has said on the subject, this does not seem to be the case. There has been much talk lately of JKR's "coyness" in answering the question of Hermione's Mirror of Erised vision. "Why won't she just come out and SAY it?!," people cry.
The truth is quite apparent to me - Ms. Rowling doesn't realize she is being interpreted as less than perfectly clear. She doesn't know that when she says "We do now know it's Ron and Hermione," that there are people who think (or rather, pretend to think, IMO) that it's possible that "now" only implies the present tense and doesn't suggest in the slightest that this might be something that carries over to the next book. She doesn't know that after writing Hermione attacking Ron with canaries after he makes out with another girl, Hermione dating another boy specifically to annoy Ron, Ron mumbling Hermione's name in his sleep after being poisoned, and Ron holding Hermione at Dumbledore's funeral while stroking her hair, when she says "entwined with another person," it is not obvious to EVERYONE exactly who that person is.
Put simply, she is putting all of the people who have read her books in the category of people with common sense and basic deduction skills. Look at her answers to shipping questions over the years...
Look at the increased incredulity at the fact that this is still a question. Yes, she does vary in exactly how much she'll say about it, but notice that she is typically only as specific as the question requires her to be (except when the question takes her by surprise, as the "snogging" question appears to). And when she does finally say definitively "we do now know that it's Ron and Hermione," she specifically prefaces it with the part I bolded - a request that both Melissa and Emerson put a spoiler warning on the interview because she's about to say something specific about the plot (something which - amazingly! - is still up for debate in some corners of the fandom).
As to why she doesn't shout the answer from the rooftops or put a banner on the front page of her website saying "R/Hr 4EVA!" or remind everyone of it every time she speaks in public ... fictional romance is supposed to be fun. Especially in books like HP. This isn't like the comments about Dumbledore, where she's trying to be as delicate as she can (especially when she's answering a child) so as not to increase the heartache readers felt/feel about that storyline. It's much different with romance, where it's meant as relief from those other, more serious plotlines, the pairings are relatively easy to guess, and the "wink"s and "nudge"s are supposed to be reminders of what we already know. It's a shared "secret" between the author and all her readers.
People say things like what she said in the Radio City appearance all the time when talking about romance. How many times have you read (or heard in real life) someone say "She's expecting a call from a certain someone." Remember Mrs. Jennings teasing Elinor about "Mr. F" in Sense and Sensibility? It's not being cagey or sly or giving people a secret clue, it's just being polite and discreet. If we were talking about real people, it would actually be a tad rude to say "When Hermione looks into a mirror that shows the deepest, most desperate desire of her heart, she sees - in addition to seeing herself and her best friends alive and well - herself entwined with Ro-o-on."
Sure, she could have specified Ron, but as I said above, she doesn't feel she needs to. She assumes that, for anyone who has read all the books, this is a given. She's not leading people on or toying with them unnecessarily. She's just winking at the people (meaning all of her fans) that she thinks are all in on the joke. Sadly, they don't all seem to be.
There seems to be a misconception among many members of this fandom. Namely, that JKR knows all about the ship debates and the various factions, that she knows and identifies H/Hr shippers (and R/Hr and H/G shippers, for that matter) as more than just a handful of fans - a significant subset of the readership of her books which she must worry herself with trying to placate.
Judging from what little she has said on the subject, this does not seem to be the case. There has been much talk lately of JKR's "coyness" in answering the question of Hermione's Mirror of Erised vision. "Why won't she just come out and SAY it?!," people cry.
The truth is quite apparent to me - Ms. Rowling doesn't realize she is being interpreted as less than perfectly clear. She doesn't know that when she says "We do now know it's Ron and Hermione," that there are people who think (or rather, pretend to think, IMO) that it's possible that "now" only implies the present tense and doesn't suggest in the slightest that this might be something that carries over to the next book. She doesn't know that after writing Hermione attacking Ron with canaries after he makes out with another girl, Hermione dating another boy specifically to annoy Ron, Ron mumbling Hermione's name in his sleep after being poisoned, and Ron holding Hermione at Dumbledore's funeral while stroking her hair, when she says "entwined with another person," it is not obvious to EVERYONE exactly who that person is.
Put simply, she is putting all of the people who have read her books in the category of people with common sense and basic deduction skills. Look at her answers to shipping questions over the years...
Q: Do Harry and Hermione have a date?
A: No, they are very platonic friends, but I won't answer for anyone else, nudge nudge wink wink. Press Club interview (October 1999)
Q: Is it just me, or was something going on between Ron and Hermione during the last half of GOF?
A: Yes, something's 'going on'... but Ron doesn't realise it yet... typical boy. Yahooligans chat (October 2000)
Q: Does Hermione like Ron as more than a friend?
A: The answer to that is in Goblet of Fire, Zsenya! Comic Relief chat (March 2001)
Q: Any snogging with Hermione?
A: Hermione and Harry! Do you think so? Ron and Hermione, I would say have-- there is more tension there. Dateline NBC interview (June 2003)
Q: Will Harry and Hermione will be together?
A: lol Not saying... but you've had enough clues by now, surely?! World Book Day Chat (March 2004)
Q: Does Hermione love Ron or Harry?
A: I can't believe that some of you haven't worked this one out yet, but I'm not going to answer because that would spoil the arguments, which I enjoy. JK Rowling Official Site
JKR: I am not going to use the word delusional. I am however, going to say — now I am trusting both of you to do the spoiler thing when you write this up — I will say, that yes, I personally feel - well it's going to be clear once people have read book six. I mean, that’s it. It’s done, isn’t it? We know. Yes, we do now know that it's Ron and Hermione. TLC/MN Interview (July 2005)
Look at the increased incredulity at the fact that this is still a question. Yes, she does vary in exactly how much she'll say about it, but notice that she is typically only as specific as the question requires her to be (except when the question takes her by surprise, as the "snogging" question appears to). And when she does finally say definitively "we do now know that it's Ron and Hermione," she specifically prefaces it with the part I bolded - a request that both Melissa and Emerson put a spoiler warning on the interview because she's about to say something specific about the plot (something which - amazingly! - is still up for debate in some corners of the fandom).
As to why she doesn't shout the answer from the rooftops or put a banner on the front page of her website saying "R/Hr 4EVA!" or remind everyone of it every time she speaks in public ... fictional romance is supposed to be fun. Especially in books like HP. This isn't like the comments about Dumbledore, where she's trying to be as delicate as she can (especially when she's answering a child) so as not to increase the heartache readers felt/feel about that storyline. It's much different with romance, where it's meant as relief from those other, more serious plotlines, the pairings are relatively easy to guess, and the "wink"s and "nudge"s are supposed to be reminders of what we already know. It's a shared "secret" between the author and all her readers.
People say things like what she said in the Radio City appearance all the time when talking about romance. How many times have you read (or heard in real life) someone say "She's expecting a call from a certain someone." Remember Mrs. Jennings teasing Elinor about "Mr. F" in Sense and Sensibility? It's not being cagey or sly or giving people a secret clue, it's just being polite and discreet. If we were talking about real people, it would actually be a tad rude to say "When Hermione looks into a mirror that shows the deepest, most desperate desire of her heart, she sees - in addition to seeing herself and her best friends alive and well - herself entwined with Ro-o-on."
Sure, she could have specified Ron, but as I said above, she doesn't feel she needs to. She assumes that, for anyone who has read all the books, this is a given. She's not leading people on or toying with them unnecessarily. She's just winking at the people (meaning all of her fans) that she thinks are all in on the joke. Sadly, they don't all seem to be.
contemplative
(mystery)
I've always thought that Jo doesn't understand the concept of shipping in the way that many of the fans do. To her, it's simply thinking two characters will end up together. I don't think she sees the rabid devotion, emotional involvement and the vicious attacks that go with the shipping debates here in fandom. I really think her exposure to the shipping debates has been limited to the more polite discussions and second-hand information given that she tends to stay away from the more *ahem* enthusiastic shipping sites.
The way she's consistently responded to the shipping questions makes it clear (to me) that she thinks her books and her interviews have made it extremely obvious who Hermione was going to end up with. In your words, her increasing incredulity that this question is still being asked despite all her previous answers is pretty strong evidence that she really cannot believe that some people haven't gotten it yet.
As for her *wink wink nudge nudge* attitude towards R/Hr, I agree with you here also. It's a common way to treat romance, and it's not a deceptive practice in the slightest.
I've often thought that if Jo could really see the shipping wars the way we see them, then she'd actually put a stop to it with a firm, unwavering answer.
(mystery)
Actually, I'm not so sure about that. See, I think that she believes that strictly preferential shippers can (or should) understand the concept of not being canon. I think that even if she is far more familiar with it than we may know, that most fans are responsible for their own damn selves taking it so personally and are responsible their own damn selves for getting over it already :D
(mystery)
(mystery)
I dunno. I can't shake the feeling that if she has seen some of the arguments we've seen that, well, she find them funny too :D
(mystery)
(mystery)
I see where you're coming from, though. Her personality does seem the type to laugh at the crazy. I'm probably just projecting what I would want to do in her situation.
(mystery)
I don't really know how to explain it better except to say that even if she knew everything about the ship wars (impossible, I know) it's my take on her personality that she still wouldn't, for several reasons, provide the kind of verbal sinking some of them say they need to believe it.
(mystery)
There's probably is some way Jo could put it that they would be forced to believe - if she yelled in anger or spoke with excrutiating, lawyerly precision. But why would she ever do that? She's just enjoying talking to her readers about her books, not participating in the fannish inquisition. She has utterly no motivation I can think of to pedantically and overprecisely communicate something she thinks she's already made clear.
(mystery)
--that it's supposed to be fun, for her and the readers
--that it's something not completely resolved
--that it's not something that should need her explicit commentary to deduce
--and even, to a degree, it's not something that all readers really care that much about
All of those lend themselves to a light touch. Seeing her talk about teenagers (even though fictional) with raging hormones using a coy approach just shouldn't be so suprising to people.
(mystery)
There seems to be a misconception among many members of this fandom. Namely, that JKR knows all about the ship debates and the various factions...
To see what a misconception it is that she knows all about the ship debates, we need look no further than her remark that people over 18 might be unfamiliar with them and need to have it whole concept explained to them. She thinks the shippers are all teenagers! And not only is this evidence that she doesn't know the shippers that well, it indicates that she has a different group in mind when she deals with shipping. She probably thinks the kids moved on pretty quickly. :P
People say things like what she said in the Radio City appearance all the time when talking about romance. How many times have you read (or heard in real life) someone say "She's expecting a call from a certain someone."
Yes, very well put. Part of the fun of romances is being a little coy about them - but it's also something we do out of politeness. She is, in a way, momentarily treating Hermione like a real person by doing her the courtesy of not bluntly and baldly stating the person she has a huge crush on. She could clinically talk about them like the fictional characters they are - "And Hermione has a thing for Ron, I planned it this way, they were made to be together" etc. (the TLC/MN interview was more like this) - but instead she affectionately shows the poor girl who's been through the love-wringer a little discretion. I think it's rather sweet!
(mystery)
(mystery)
Besides, if you wanted to be really technically assinine about it, NOW would mean the present, as in 2006. The books end in. . . what did Van derArk say? 1996? 10 years and R/Hr still sails.
(mystery)
1991 -- Harry is 11 -- 1st year.
1992 -- 12 -- 2nd year.
1993 -- 13 -- 3rd year.
Etc.
Easy way to remember.
(mystery)
(mystery)
(mystery)
Now we know it's Ron and Hermione.
Now Harry knows he's a wizard.
In fact, that very construction of "it's Ron and Hermione" implies that she feels this to be a truism that transcends time; it simply IS, just like her statement about Harry and Hermione being very platonic friends. They ARE platonic. A truism, a way of describing their friendship forevermore. It doesn't refer to their friendship in a single moment in time and cease to describe it at some point when they cease to be platonic. I doubt that she ever thought she was being confusing about that. The platonic statement, like the "now we know it's Ron and Hermione" statment, needs to be misunderstood ON PURPOSE. Absolute bloody-mindedness is required in order to NOT get it.
That's not something she intended, clearly. She no doubt felt that "platonic" was as clear as she could get. She probably thought she was being pretty clear about Ron and Hermione last summer as well. There's nothing wrong with these statements and there is no reason to require her to clarify; she has done so, repeatedly and with no meanness of spirit or attempt at obfuscation. Anyone saying otherwise is just kidding themselves.
(mystery)
(mystery)
It was only on the next night that she finally talked freely about spoilers when she said Dumbledore's definetely dead. But even then she tried not to be totally explicit at first (she said DD would not do a Gandalf first, even if the boy who made the question was quite explicit about it). She finally got explicit because she felt she had to make fans pass the denial stage.
(mystery)
"Now we know"
The way she put that in the MN/TLC interview seems to suggest that she was speaking from the book's POV, or to what the sixth book suggests about Ron and Hermione, (which is from Harry's point of view and what he thinks about Ron and Hermione) which is that they love one another and will get together soon.
But Harry's POV about Ron and Hermione could be wrong, just as he's been wrong about countless other assumptions before, misleading us as the reader as well. After all, the fact that neither Ron or Hermione have made any movement in six years towards getting together, and the fact that neither have said anything whatsoever to Harry to confirm his suspicions about their feelings for one another looks mighty fishy.
I think though it's very possible that the shipping question is truly over, there is still some question about whether Rowling was speaking about us knowing it's Ron and Hermione from her telling us, or us "knowing" it's Ron and Hermione from our reading of the sixth book.
If this is the case, then indeed, everything could be turned on it's ear in the seventh book. R/Hr has always looked fishy to me because of the lack of admission for six years from either party to Harry or anyone else that they have feelings for one another, and the lack of any progress on either Ron or Hermione's part to finally admit "feelings" for one another. And the mere fact that when something happens that should make them admit feelings if there are any, all that happens is that they begin behaving more "civilized" towards one another. It just makes no sense if they really are crazy in love with one another.
If there is no question to R/Hr, then why hasn't Harry ever gotten a confirmation yet from either one, or someone else, that R and Hr like one another?
Not even Ron's own family, Ginny or the twins, make any jokes about his supposed feelings for Hermione... no one thinks anything about it... and if the Weasley twins will rib Ginny about her feelings and boyfriends, why wouldn't they do it to Ron, whose feelings about Hermione should be "so obvious", and who they have always picked on for anything they could find to pick on him for?
Too much does not add up, and too much DOES add up to that Harry is going to find out that he's been wrong all along about Ron and Hermione's feelings... in which case, all of Hermione's actions towards Harry, and the reactions from Krum and Cho toward Harry and Hermione, will quickly add up to that she's been in love with him all along, and he will finally find that out.
I believe that Rowling always speaks about the books with the information that we already think we have from them. She gives us nothing new, only what we've already read and think we know. And what we know is most often what Harry knows.. or thinks he knows by the book's end. As Rowling has said that book six seems one half of a larger book made up of six and seven (which is the first time that one book "skids off" into another, as she herself said), then we can be safely certain that reveals and twists and turns are coming in book seven, which were set up with red-herrings and misunderstandings from book six. Whether or not Harry, and consequently WE are wrong about what we assume from book six, always remains to be seen in the next book.
Again, Rowling was speaking only about what we "know" from book six... which is what Harry thinks he knows. When speaking about specific plot points in her interviews, she always just reiterates what we already "know" from the books, and nothing more. Rowling is not going to let slip what in book six is going to be revealed as a red-herring or a twist in book seven.
I think we should all remember that.
Re: "Now we know"
Again, Rowling was speaking only about what we "know" from book six... which is what Harry thinks he knows.
Nah. She was speaking not about what Harry knows after book 6, but what we as informed, careful readers know - which is hardly the same thing.
Harry is a character in a book - but he doesn't know that. We do. We understand that, unlike in real life, narrative threads will have coherence, progression and resolution, and moreover we can infer from what we know of literary style - both in general and this author's in particular - what sort of developments are possible, are likely, or are even - as in this case - unambiguously indicated.
I would disagree, in fact, that Harry knows that "it's Ron and Hermione" at all. He clearly sensed the attraction between them, enough to have "an inkling" that they might get together - he saw Hermione tell Ron to ask her out the next time, after all, and he saw her two years later finally give in and ask him out herself - which certainly sounds like "movement towards getting together" to me, by the way. But then he saw Ron date someone else, Hermione lose it with jealousy, and their friendship suffer seriously. I'm sure he was delighted and relieved when they reconciled, but he could hardly be certain that their reconciliation would stretch all the way back to their getting together as a couple.
We, on the other hand are readers - we know better. We understand the kind of trope that is being presented here - the bickering, opposites-attract couple that lead us on an excruciating journey before we finally get the romantic payoff. In real life they might just drift apart, but this is fiction - and in fiction the plotline of their romance, introduced many books ago, is going to have a resolution. When Hermione gets so jealous that she sends her canaries after Ron, someone like Harry would have every reason to wonder if they'd ever speak again - but at that moment we as readers know all the more clearly that of course they're going to get together, because that's where this story arc is taking them. We see he likes her, we see she likes him, and we see the insecurities and misunderstandings and simple need to grow up that have been placed as obstacles in their path. It's funny, it's heartbreaking - and in the end it will finally be satisfying.
Jo said what she said in that interview not in the context of the characters' knowledge, but in reaction to statements about what was "painfully obvious in the first five books" and whether certain groups of shippers had deceived themselves - that is, she was talking about what the readers know. JKR said "we do now know it's Ron and Hermione" not because Harry knew it - Harry can indeed be wrong - but because it was her clear expectation that we, the audience, now knew it. Or that at least by now we sure ought to.
Re: "Now we know"
Instead of thinking that they are jealous of each other romantically, why not think that Ron treats her like 1) his sister and 2) is competitive? What's the difference between how he treats Ginny and Hermione when it comes to "jealousy?" Is Ron jealous of Dean, or Michael Corner? He treats them just like he does Krum. Why wouldn't he want to prove that he can get action with Lavendar as much as his two best buddies Harry and Hermione, as well as his younger sister Ginny?
Really, what evidence is there that Ron likes Hermione romantically instead of him being his usual overprotective, competitive self?
What you are arguing, basically, is that JKR has to be following a bickering lover cliche, because we all know that's just how fictional love works? What canon evidence is there that she is?
See, there's two ways to interpret Ron: The OBHWF "Bickering! SOOOO Cute! And funny--awww, they're hooking UP, man!" and the idea that Ron is more protective and competitive, as a good friend would be.
Each of those ideas have issues. And you may wish to consider something: Many of the most prominent H/Hr shippers NOW became H/Hr shippers after book 6. The "oldtimers" certainly didn't go out converting people. We were all disgusted with book 6. Yet almost all the new theorists and stuff are post HBP people--and in fact, are trying to drag the rest of us along. If it's so obvious, why are there so many new H/Hr shippers? Practically all the old Harmonians have left fandom from disgust. The big names on the OBHWF side are still around. Not so on the Harmonian side. You don't see MEM, or Athena, or Nia, Falcon, etc around. The modern Harmonian movement is almost entirely brand new, post HBP. Maybe you should stop for a second and ask why there are still so many people; new people who'd never ever read the love thread, been "brainwashed" etc who took up the torch. Certainly the old-timers didn't encourage them. I still refer people to old H/Hr essays that say what they have come up with now--and they've never read them. I myself am not certain that JKR is going H/Hr; in fact I usually think she's going to do OBWHF. That doesn't mean that OBHWF makes a convincing argument, though. But asking pointed quetions is, apparently, a sign of delusions. Can you guys actually answer stuff, instead of mock and laugh? Surely, if it is so obvious that it's OBHWF, then everything is easily explainable, no question. It's no mystery, right? JKR got it all out of the way! JKR managed to firmly write the compete, no way to misinterpret truth! Only those with mental disorders cannot see and answer everything!
Are you up for it? Or don't you still have some secret worry still?
(mystery)
Last summer, when Emerson made that "delusional" comment, I cringed a bit and thought he was too harsh. But the more I see of people trying to explain away what has been so PATENTLY established, the more I think that Mr. Spartz was too kind.
Please. Save yourself the energy and grief. Either accept that you were wrong and enjoy your ship in fanon or don't bother with book 7. As much as it would entertain myself and many others to watch you guys implode spectacularly for a second time, it's just not worth getting your hopes up only to have them dashed all over again.
"implode" heh heh
Been there, done that, so to speak. If it doesn't happen, I won't say to myself that I had no inkling that it wouldn't. All we're doing here is looking at the facts, or the LACK of facts presented, and theorizing what's coming based on those.
I can only speak for myself and say that though I will be disappointed in what Rowling chose to write if she DOES go the cliche OBHWF, I will certainly not implode. I will just realize that as far as romance is concerned, Rowling isn't the best at writing it, and that I disagree with what she considers makes two people "good" romantically for one another.
But none of this keeps me from seeing what's clearly NOT stated in canon, and that is that there is any proof other than what Harry looks at as "jealousy" that Ron and Hermione really like one another. I won't go into all the reasons I previously stated. They're all in my previous post.
But really and truly, that's all the evidence there is. They move no closer in six years to getting together, no one else speaks of it, not even Ron's family, Ron repeatedly says things like "completely missed the point" "never promised her anything, free agent, just as friends"... and no one believes him.
Isn't it possible that Harry will learn that Ron's been completely honest in all this, and that Hermione's actions toward Ron were not what he thought they were? Ron's had three years since GoF to realize what he's been feeling. For any normal person, and certainly for one who is now seventeen, that's plenty of time to understand what you're feeling.
I think Heron/Chocos, although you DO have a case, don't get me wrong, tend to ignore the fact that there very well COULD be something else going on here.
I see the same misunderstandings and misguided notions about romance going on here as I do in "Emma" by Jane Austen (Rowling's favorite book, and one that she continues to mention). Suffice it to say I won't go into it here, but what I see is that the romantic situations in HP have been set up as such that if Harry does find out in the end he's been wrong all along, I can certainly see how Rowling did it, and that she gave him just enough misinformation and not enough true information, and us as well, for him and us to have been fooled.
That's what I think is happening. Could I be wrong? Oh yes, definitely. And if I am, oh well. But I see too many similarities to "Emma" and things that don't add up to just think that what we're seeing on the surface about the romances and that what Harry believes must be true.
I guess we'll see. But I just think that if you ignore everything that points to that something else might be going on, then YOU are the one who may have been fooled in the end. ;0)
Cheers, Bama
Re: "Now we know"
Re: "Now we know"
Really, what evidence is there that Ron likes Hermione romantically instead of him being his usual overprotective, competitive self?
Yeah! It's not like he cries out her name in his sleep, or anything. XD
See, there's two ways to interpret Ron: The OBHWF "Bickering! SOOOO Cute! And funny--awww, they're hooking UP, man!" and the idea that Ron is more protective and competitive, as a good friend would be.
Actually, there are an infinite number of ways to interpret Ron's behavior towards Hermione - the clearly communicated one in the books, and an arbitrary number of false interpretations. You've picked one; I'm sure you could invent others.
Didn't I just get through describing how even the author has clearly and unambiguously communicated how clear and unambiguous she thinks the Ron/Hermione romance is? What exactly are we hoping to achieve here? C'mon; JKR yelled "NO!" at a bunch of people who cheered for Harry and Hermione getting together. She was exasperated. And I'm supposed to ardently pursue a line of inquiry that makes even the author throw up her hands by now?
Can you guys actually answer stuff, instead of mock and laugh?
Of course we can; we've just figured out by now that some people don't bother listening to the answers.
Re: "Now we know"
However, it seems to me you guys are setting yourselves up for a huge fall. Pride and all that. I do hope you won't mind me gloating outrageously if it does go H/Hr. And calling you guys everything you've called us. You do know you won't be able to say I didn't warn you you were being too proud.
Re: "Now we know"
And I wouldn't call it pride that makes us so confident. We simply trust the author and find it rather tacky for people to accuse her of being deceptive when she's trying to get her intentions across as tastefully and appropriately as possible.
Re: "Now we know"
I agree completely. Certainly insofar as knowing that H/Hr ain't gonna happen. On that, books alone make me very, very confident. JKR's quotes make me certain.
I suppose some of us are a bit too sure about the inevitability of H/G & R/Hr with all of them alive for a good long while after Voldemort's defeat. Maybe pride (and/or wishful thinking) is a small part of it, perhaps.
Anyway, I'm sure there will be gloating and glee from some individuals even w/o H/Hr should OBHWF not materialize in full. And, hey, I'm prepared to take that medicine too.
O.o -- does anything here mean we don't 'get' to gloat after book 7?
Nah, after all, apparently we'll still have that opportunity to be obnoxious about our ability to correctly interpret her quotes too. Maybe vanceone is right about something though: that really ISN'T something we have reason to get all big-headed about :p
Re: "Now we know"
You don't say.
However, it seems to me you guys are setting yourselves up for a huge fall. Pride and all that. I do hope you won't mind me gloating outrageously if it does go H/Hr. And calling you guys everything you've called us. You do know you won't be able to say I didn't warn you you were being too proud.
Drama club auditions are held in the auditorium after school. Best of luck!
Re: "Now we know"
What I was saying, is that Rowling could have been only reiterating, in her interview, what we now "know" from the book, which is that it's Ron and Hermione.
In HBP, she laid more "anvils" than ever that it is indeed Ron and Hermione who like one another. Harry himself has thought that "it was only a matter of time" and knew that "something like this would eventually happen", and thought to himself that he would just have to see what would happen "under the influence of dim lights and butterbeer". That speaks to that he KNOWS that it's Ron and Hermione.
What that DOESN'T tell us, however, is whether or not Harry is right in his assumptions.
So as of book six, yes, we do now "know" that it's Ron and Hermione... just like Harry thinks he "knows".
But if it turns out that Harry's been wrong all this time about that R and Hr like one another romantically (and I explained in my previous posting why I think the text supports a twist in that direction), then what we now "know" will be turned on it's ear, just like what Harry thinks he "knows" will.
I still believe that when Rowling speaks about specific plot points in her books, she only speaks about them in regards to what we already know from the books.. which is usually what Harry knows, since most everything is written from his point of view... and certainly R/Hr is written from his point of view, in that he views their behavior as evidence that they like one another romantically.
Anything beyond what the book has already told us she does not answer, because it is giving away her plot, unless she's directly shooting down something, in which case, she makes no bones about it, but says directly... "No____ will not happen." When she's shooting down a theory, she's never coy or says it in a round about way. She says "No, Dumbledore is most definitely dead." "No, Neville and Luna will not happen. I find them different people." "No, Draco and Hermione.. Draco and Ginny will not happen."
She's never done this with H/Hr. That coupled with all else I've already posted leads me to believe that she's being coy for a reason.
Cheers, Bama...
and sorry for posting anonymously... I figured everyone would soon know who I was anyway. But I think I've been pretty respectful! I hope so, anyway. :0)
And I will hijack ConnieLane's LJ no further.
Re: "Now we know"
I fear you misunderstood me. I was not trying to tell you that we are readers - I trust you are comfortable with that. Rather, I was pointing out that even though Harry is the point of view character, we nonetheless can know more than him. Even though we see what's around him, we can deduce more than he does! We are clever, we can reread, and we know it's a book. I don't think Ron and Hermione are going to get together because Harry does, after the grand total of two times we've ever heard him think about it. I know more than Harry does. We all do.
Perhaps now my previous comment will make more sense.
She's never done this with H/Hr.
I disagree; I think she did precisely this in the TLC/MN interview, and much of the discussion since then has been about ways to obfuscate what she did in fact convey clearly. The main difference I see between that and the other ship-sinkings you mention is that in the case of H/Hr, she evidently believed she was only telling people who had read book 6 what they already knew.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Re: "Now we know"
Jeez I hope I did that right... if not, I apologize.
Well, actually what I think is that although we CAN know more than Harry, we often do not. Anything we see is because Harry has seen it first. Anything out of his line of vision or not heard by him we are not privy too. So therefore, we are basing our assumptions on what Harry is seeing, and nothing more. Though we may, or may not share his opinion/assessment of what is going on around him, that does not mean that we are right and he is wrong, or vice versa.
Many times at the end of the book, when the reveals come, we were just as fooled as he was. Kudos to those who figure everything out beforehand, but I doubt anyone has everything correctly and completely figured out, despite Harry's own feelings about the issue.
It's been evident ever since the Yule Brawl that Harry has thought Ron and Hermione have a thing for one another... ever since he thought that "Hermione got the point better than Ron did."
We may think like Harry does, that there is something going on between Ron and Hermione, but as is typical, Rowling has given us just enough information to come to a conclusion like that, but not enough to confirm it. Harry has NEVER had a confirmation of his suspicions about Ron and Hermione's behavior.. from either of them, or from anyone else. That's what I'm saying. We may find out we were wrong in our assumptions, because thus far, all we have is the fights between them that WE view as jealousy, but which has not been confirmed as such by either party (Ron or Hermione)... in fact, Ron often DENIES that that's what it is, and DID deny in HBP that he even considered he and Hermione going to Slughorn's party as a date, and said "just as friends" "free agent" and Harry simply doesn't believe him!
Both our assumptions and Harry's assumptions about Ron and Hermione's behavior might be wrong. We aren't privy to any more scenes or conversations than what Harry sees/hears. Whatever he sees, we see.. whatever he hears, we hear... nothing more and nothing less. Therefore, we're deriving our information and conclusions from the same evidence, and no more, that Harry is.
[quote] I disagree; I think she did precisely this in the TLC/MN interview, and much of the discussion since then has been about ways to obfuscate what she did in fact convey clearly. The main difference I see between that and the other ship-sinkings you mention is that in the case of H/Hr, she evidently believed she was only telling people who had read book 6 what they already knew.[/quote]
Actually, she did not shoot down H/Hr... she seemed as if she was confirming R/Hr and H/G, but not once did she even mention H/Hr. She did everything BUT mention it, and certainly never said "No, H/Hr will never happen", as she's done with other ships and theories, which is what I stated.
What I meant is that she has not, concretely said "No" to H/Hr like she has other theories and ships. If you have this quote, please provide it, because all the interviews I've read so far have nothing like this in them. The IoD, I've read, three or four times. Not once does she mention H/Hr or shoot down the ship. All she does is seem to confirm the two that seemed obvious in book six, without actually really confirming them.
Cheers, Bama
Re: "Now we know"
And no, she hasn't flat out said "Harry and Hermione will never be together." But the whole point of my post was that she doesn't feel she has to. She doesn't want to hold people's hands and give absolute answers when it comes to this stuff, because it's boring and people just don't talk about romance in that kind of banal "X-loves-Y" way - unless they're being ironic or parodying something. It's just no FUN that way.
I understand how people might feel that it's also not fun to be on the losing end of JKR's "wink"s and "nudge"s. To that I can only say that, while it's regrettable, that's just life. That's what happens when you let yourself get attached to something that's in someone else's hands to bring about. If you put your own desires for the outcome ahead of getting to the bottom of what the author is actually doing, you're taking a great risk in having your heart broken.
Re: "Now we know"
I'm really delighted that you think so! I've read so many H/Hr shippers go on about how there is absolutely no romantic implication in this scene whatsoever. But it seems as long as you tell yourself it's "just Harry's interpretation" you can see it perfectly clearly. Now you just have to take the next step and realize it's not just Harry. ;)
Ron often DENIES that that's what it is... and said "just as friends" "free agent" and Harry simply doesn't believe him!
Harry doesn't say whether he believes him. How do you know if he does? I think you mean something different than I do when you say "Harry thinks." I think you mean "the narration implies it is the case," regardless of whether Harry has any stated opinion on the matter at all.
And I have to confess - I do form my opinions on this world by actually reading the words in the books. If you want to take every single thing that's written and call it "Harry's opinion" and say the entire narrative is always suspect - and that therefore we can never know anything at all - then I don't know what to tell you. Only that I urge you to be brave instead!
Actually, she did not shoot down H/Hr... she seemed as if she was confirming R/Hr and H/G, but not once did she even mention H/Hr. She did everything BUT mention it
But H/Hr was exactly what they were talking about - it was the lead-in to her statement! Look at the context of her words: Emerson called H/Hr's delusional, and JKR said she's not going to say that, BUT "I am however, going to say..." She didn't just change the subject midstream - they were talking about the idea of shipping Harry/Hermione, and she responded with her own statement on the subject that she thought was more tactful than what Emerson said. And her more-tactful statement in response to the idea of H/Hr was "it's going to be clear once you've read book 6" and "it's done" and "it's Ron and Hermione."
Re: "Now we know"
I'm really delighted that you think so! I've read etc"
Well, the scene implies romance from Harry's POV. Harry thinks Ron missed the point, even though Ron says that Hermione missed it.
But whether or not Harry is wrong in his assumption remains to be seen. And again, because Harry never gets confirmation about his feelings this can very well set us, and Harry up for finding out that he's been wrong all along.
The R/Hr issue is just another area where Rowling gives enough information to come to a conclusion, but not enough to confirm whether or not that conclusion is the correct one. This has gone on regarding R/Hr for at least three years. I find that suspicious. Since Rowling has surprised us before based on insufficient info, I say it can be happening again.
PeachesPig:
"Harry doesn't say whether he believes him..."
Harry says later that he'd known this was coming, and that he would have to see what happened between them under the influence of dim lights and butterbeer. This is regarding when Harry assumes that Hermione is asking Ron on a "date" to Slughorn's party, though actually Hermione had been hinting for some time that Harry should hurry up and find a date because of the girls waiting to potion him, and only asked Ron when Harry told her there was no one he wanted to take. Ron assumes Hermione asks him as friends, he's a "free agent" "never promised her anything". HARRY is the one who thought otherwise.
PeachesPig: "I think you mean something different than I do when you say "Harry thinks..."
Whatever we do or don't know, hear, or witness between Ron and Hermione is what Harry doesn't know either. We only know what we know when Harry hears about it or witnesses it. Therefore Harry and the reader are basing their conclusions on the same information or lack thereof. Harry, and the reader may be wrong. We may be being fooled just like Harry might be.
Rowling has used limited information, or misinformation, or wrong conclusions to bring about twists before.
PeachesPig: "And I have to confess - I do form my opinions on this world by actually reading the words in the books... Only that I urge you to be brave instead!"
"Brave"? Erm... I don't know what you mean by that. I don't remember trembling this morning. lol
But yes...the style of writing Rowling is using often limits our information, and therefore often misleads us. The info she gives us may be PART of the answer, but may lead us to thinking the wrong way, just like Harry has done before. Or the info may be vague enough as to be looked at several ways, and we happen to pick the most obvious, but wrong one. I see R/Hr's feelings as one of those ambiguous areas in canon, and I see that Rowling may have decided to KEEP it that way for a reason.
Harry's suspicions about R/Hr have never been confirmed in all this time. I find that highly suspicious of a red-herring.
PeachesPig: But H/Hr was exactly what they were talking about etc etc "
And all she did was confirm the "anvils" she laid down, which no one is denying.
What we're thinking is that the whole reason they weren't merely clues, but anvils, was to hide the coming twist.
Now that I've read "Emma", I can see it clearly, and now that I've learned some about the alchemical steps the "seeker" goes through to becoming the "philosopher's stone", it makes sense that H/G happened too. Ginny was a stepping stone in Harry's journey.
Since Rowling IS setting up for a twist (in my opinion, she is), then of course, in her interview, she's going to reinforce the red-herrings she so carefully laid down.
PeachesPig: She didn't just change the subject midstream etc etc"
I reread book six like she told us too. Having done so, I see where certain things can be looked at differently.
And as Rowling also told a young interviewer named Emma Coad that only half her answer (about H/Hr) was in book six, I'm going to take that to mean that all is not over concerning shipping.
And now I'm truly done.
Re: "Now we know"
I just meant that staying entirely agnostic on the interpretation of anything and everything seems kind of sad to me. (Unless it's only shipping you refuse to believe the text about? But I can't see why shipping would be that important, so I have to assume you mean everything.) By "brave" I meant, don't let the fear of some bogeyman "twist" scare you away from deciding that you can, in fact, draw conclusions about events from the books! They're not a mass of wall-to-wall deception and trickery. Parts of them are a rather moving and sweet story about growing up. The books are trying to tell you a story. Let them!
Since Rowling IS setting up for a twist (in my opinion, she is), then of course, in her interview, she's going to reinforce the red-herrings she so carefully laid down.
*Shrug* So you won't draw conclusions from the books because it could all mean anything, and you won't believe a word of the author because she's deceiving us all to protect her deceptive books? (Except the bit about Emma Coad - appearently you took that at face value for some reason.) What can I say to that? If you'll really believe nothing at all, then there's nothing left we can discuss.
Re: "Now we know"
Let's thank God for small favors then and leave it at that, shall we? :0/
I'm just of the opinion that Rowling is not going to give any part of her book away in an interview. I see that she only reiterated what we already think we know from the books. She told us nothing people had not already read into book six... particularly her HeronChoco interviewers in the IoD.
You apparently think Rowling has no prob giving away some of her plots in an interview one book short of the series ending. I just don't see it. I think that would be crazy for an author to do that, especially one who has chosen to write her series the way Rowling has... keeping us guessing about the truth of the matter and constantly searching for clues.
And for the love of all that's holy, I guess I'm a glutton for punishment. So I leave you to your snark and unwillingness to see anything any other way than what's directly on the surface.
As for me, I'll keep on thinking that Rowling might still be hiding all of her ending, and if I'm wrong, then I won't be completely devistated, because all I'm doing is looking beyond the surface of things, which I've learned to do from all of the previous books Rowling has written. If Rowling was being completely open about everything, then fine. I just happen to think she hasn't been.
Re: "Now we know"
Why would she bother with that if it were just a red herring? If she has no problem giving away red herrings in her interviews, WHY did she tell her interviewers to warn people not to read her comments if they hadn't finished the book yet?
Re: "Now we know"
And yet just a moment earlier you held up her "sinking" of Draco/Hermione as a model? That was an interview. That was "giving something away." It seems to me that when she feels like it, she will indeed give away things, and moreover that you know this; so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove changing your argument now into a blanket statement that even you don't evidently believe. You can't both hold up D/Hr as a model for how she sinks ships and also claim that she would never give anything away!
But anyway, it's kind of beside the point; as I've emphasized, she clearly thought in her interview that she was only reiterating what the reader who had gotten through book 6 already knew. She didn't seem to think she was giving anything away at all.
So I leave you to your snark and unwillingness to see anything any other way than what's directly on the surface.
"What's directly on the surface"? Look, there is no inherent virtue in making things much more complicated than they really are. My goal has been to try to find out the truth about what she's doing. If that truth is is very simple, so be it. If it's extremely complicated, that's fine. It seems it's somewhere in the middle. I think it's clear that her romantic pairings can't be that obvious, or there wouldn't have been any debate about it!
If you find a problem that you're trying to solve too easy, maybe it's time to find a harder problem, instead of pretending the one you've got is something other than it is.
If Rowling was being completely open about everything, then fine. I just happen to think she hasn't been.
"Everything"? Of course she hasn't been completely open about everything; she quite pointedly has refused to explain or discuss certain things about Snape, Dumbledore, and obviously the Horcruxes and so on. Remember all that? Her refusal to give away the conclusion to the main dramatic story has nothing to do with her acknowledging the way the romances are going.