[Smertios]

[youtube]XhnhHnViLCQ[/youtube]

“Steve Kloves: There was this part in the script, when he was in the cupboard, I invented him a spider named Alastor, who he talked to. And he used to nick broken soldiers out of the rubbish bin, and he lined them up on the shelf. This broken army that Dudley had thrown out.

J.K. Rowling: It was such a great image, the broken army.

Kloves: And he used to talk to them, and the point was that he seemed slightly mad when I wrote the first draft. When Hagrid appeared, you thought he was out of his imagination for a minute. He had summoned this guy –

Rowling: I think that’s a fabulous point, and that speaks so perfectly to the truth to the books, because I had it suggested that to me more than once that Harry actually did go mad in the cupboard, and that everything that happened subsequently was some sort of fantasy life he developed to save himself.

Kloves: No and that’s where it came from. It came from the book. When you read the book, you make it pretty clear that he’s an abused boy.

Rowling: Totally. Of course he is.

Kloves: And so, there’s darkness there, and I would go with that.”

Okay, this was pretty ambiguous. I'm currently unsure whether she meant that people suggested it to her (despite it not being the case) or it is a valid interpretation of the book. She makes it quite clear that it does “speak perfectly to the truth to the books”. So I don't know.

If this had actually been added to the books, it would have been an awesome finale. Imagine, after Voldemort is gone, Harry simply wakes up from the most amazing dream ever. It would piss a lot of people off, but it would still be a great ending. Completely unexpected.

Either way, it is still disappointing...

[Lensky1917]

Yeah, there are too many things that bug me in the Harry Potter books. I've always thought that Harry is way too well-rounded as a person despite spending his first 10 years of his life in a fucking closet. He either should have become a weak, cowardly, shell of a person and been sorted into Hufflepuff or a total Muggle-hating asshole and been in Slytherin.

She could have just made him gay, and used the closet as a metaphor. And that the Dursleys were trying to suppress his homosexuality.

I do think that him ending up with Ginny was just about marrying into a huge family that he never had.

In the first book it bugs me that Mrs. Weasley asked what the platform number was when it was her 6th child she was sending off to Hogwarts. You would think she'd know it by now, right?

[Rei Murasame]

I'm currently unsure whether she meant that people suggested it to her (despite it not being the case) or it is a valid interpretation of the book.

I think it was that people suggested it to her as a way of expressing how traumatic what he'd gone through was, but that of course this would not be a valid interpretation of the book.

She makes it quite clear that it does “speak perfectly to the truth to the books”.

When she says that, she means that the fact that her writing could cause someone to suggest that Harry could go mad (although he didn't) tells her how a good a writer she is that she managed to communicate the level of abuse that he received well enough that someone might suggest that it'd be almost believable if he'd gone mad in the cupboard.

[Goldberk]

Frankly the books/films just bugged me because they were generic tropes badly written but well marketed

[Smertios]

She could have just made him gay, and used the closet as a metaphor. And that the Dursleys were trying to suppress his homosexuality.

That would have been incredibly funny. And kinda silly.

I think it was that people suggested it to her as a way of expressing how traumatic what he'd gone through was, but that of course this would not be a valid interpretation of the book.

When she says that, she means that the fact that her writing could cause someone to suggest that Harry could go mad (although he didn't) tells her how a good a writer she is that she managed to communicate the level of abuse that he received well enough that someone might suggest that it'd be almost believable if he'd gone mad in the cupboard.

Semantically, either interpretation would be correct. Pragmatically, it's up to debate.

Frankly the books/films just bugged me because they were generic tropes badly written but well marketed

Badly written? Seriously?

[Rei Murasame]

Semantically, either interpretation would be correct. Pragmatically, it's up to debate.

Is there any audio of the tone of voice they've said it in? I don't think that the "he went mad, literally" view of it is the likely meaning of it at all. If she meant that, she'd have said it outright.

[Smertios]

Is there any audio of the tone of voice they've said it in?

I posted a video of the interview there.

The audio is included...

I don't think that the "he went mad, literally" view of it is the likely meaning of it at all. If she meant that, she'd have said it outright.

Well, you also have to add the fact that the interview wasn't about whether or not Harry got crazy, but about comparing the films to the books.

But I agree it is kind of weird that she would drop such polemic issue just like that...

[Lensky1917]

Badly written? Seriously?

Yes.

For one thing, the character development is too quick. Harry and Ginny sort of just seemed to get together 'just like that' and Harry goes from a idiot, average wizard who gets everyone around him hurt and/or killed to understanding Dumbledore's master plan?

Also the simplistic good triumphs over evil, and everyone lives happily fucking ever after ending? There weren't a bunch of Death Eaters, and other unsavory people to be rounded up? Hogwarts getting rebuilt? Counseling to those who were hurt and tortured? It's not really mentioned what they did after Hogwarts and the fates of other people.

[Tainari88]

Rei, I never read any of JK Rowling's books and never saw any of the films---what is it all about?

[Lensky1917]

Rei, I never read any of JK Rowling's books and never saw any of the films---what is it all about?

Seriously?

It's about a kid who finds out he's a wizard after 10 years of abuse from his Aunt and Uncle who claimed that his parents died in a car crash when they were actually whacked by the most powerful evil wizard of all. And he goes to a magical school to learn magic and get into a bunch of trouble and danger.

[Smertios]

For one thing, the character development is too quick. Harry and Ginny sort of just seemed to get together 'just like that' and Harry goes from a idiot, average wizard who gets everyone around him hurt and/or killed to understanding Dumbledore's master plan?

Over the course of 7 years... Harry went through the whole process of education and development, and went from a mere child to an adult, after all.

The Lord of the Rings happens much faster, in my opinion. But of course, the LotR books were much smaller.

Also the simplistic good triumphs over evil, and everyone lives happily fucking ever after ending?

It was a children's book. Did you expect a realist work, with everyone being disappointed in the end?

There weren't a bunch of Death Eaters, and other unsavory people to be rounded up? Hogwarts getting rebuilt? Counseling to those who were hurt and tortured? It's not really mentioned what they did after Hogwarts and the fates of other people.

What book covers the entire story of the whole world after ending? o_0

There was an epilogue in the seventh book, which explained the future developments of each character. But honestly, that was the worst thing about the books, in my opinion. It would have been better without any epilogue, so the reader could think for himself about what happens afterward.

Rei, I never read any of JK Rowling's books and never saw any of the films---what is it all about?

The Harry Potter series is a classic example of a coming of age story, centered on the story of a young boy who discovers that he is a wizard when he is 11 years old. From then, the story follows through his whole adolescence, attending a magical school and becoming an adult, while also having to face the political troubles of a civil war within the magical community, with a wizard supremacist who wanted to eliminate non-wizards and half-bloods from their society coming to power.

[Lensky1917]

Over the course of 7 years... Harry went through the whole process of education and development, and went from a mere child to an adult, after all.

I'm just talking about his development between Book 5 and 7. It seems to me that she made him a lot smarter than normal in the last two books.

He was a total idiot in Book 5 lacking the common sense to use the magical mirror phone that Sirius gave him.

The Lord of the Rings happens much faster, in my opinion. But of course, the LotR books were much smaller.

LotR is overrated. The characters are too damned bland and generic, and their entire quest was idiotic as Gandalf could have dropped the fucking ring into Mount Doom with the Eagles the entire time.

It was a children's book. Did you expect a realist work, with everyone being disappointed in the end?

But I was disappointed.

Besides, she sure wasn't shy about killing characters off. The deaths just weren't very important and didn't help drive the plot like George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire.

I was actually hoping that Harry would die, or at least end up with Hermione. Ron could have been paired with Luna(smart, but hampered by being a total dingbat who believes everything her father says), and Neville could have wound up with Ginny(they were in Hogwarts together their final year).

What book covers the entire story of the whole world after ending? o_0

There was an epilogue in the seventh book, which explained the future developments of each character.

I wasn't talking about the 'whole world', just the important characters. And who doesn't like a little closure? The epilogue was completely half-assed. The gist being; Harry marries Ginny, Ron marries Hermione. They have kids, they still hate Draco, and Neville is a Herbology Professor.

Whoop-de-fucking-do.

while also having to face the political troubles of a civil war within the magical community

I wouldn't really say he faced 'political troubles', it's not like he was running for office or something. All he cared about was stopping Voldemort. But a good summary overall.

[Bounce]

LotR is overrated. The characters are too damned bland and generic, and their entire quest was idiotic as Gandalf could have dropped the fucking ring into Mount Doom with the Eagles the entire time.

The eagles would not have been able to fly over Mordor without the army being drawn out and distracted. I haven't read it in a long time, but I'm sure there are more reasons to why the eagles weren't used.

[Lensky1917]

The eagles would not have been able to fly over Mordor without the army being drawn out and distracted. I haven't read it in a long time, but I'm sure there are more reasons to why the eagles weren't used.

They're giant fucking eagles. They are fast and would easily be able to stay out of range of any projectile weapons. Just a quick in and out operation.

[Bounce]

They're giant fucking eagles. They are fast and would easily be able to stay out of range of any projectile weapons. Just a quick in and out operation.

Nazgul > eagles.

Anyway, read this

I still think he couldn't have left that plot hole in the story.

[zamaane]

She could have just made him gay, and used the closet as a metaphor. And that the Dursleys were trying to suppress his homosexuality.

Which is probably why he likes to play Quidditch so much, a sport that involves handling balls and running around with wood between your legs. Also probably why Vernon Dursley was so opposed to the "M" word (men) in the second book.

[Sceptic]

If this had actually been added to the books, it would have been an awesome finale. Imagine, after Voldemort is gone, Harry simply wakes up from the most amazing dream ever. It would piss a lot of people off, but it would still be a great ending. Completely unexpected.

Rule #1 of all creative writing courses: "I woke up and it was all just a dream" is the worst story ending ever.

[Tainari88]

Well, I won't be able to read it now. All the wizard stuff just doesn't interest me much. I like different types of fiction. I love science fiction but it has to be realistic for me to like it. Not made up stuff. The only made up stuff I love has to be very creative--not geared to youngsters. I did not even like youthful fiction when I was a kid. I remember reading Dickens and Tolstoy when I was eleven years old. I did not like the kiddie scholastic books they had back then and much less the crap they peddle to youth nowadays. My father only allowed me to read classic literature from all over the world when I was 9-12 years old. After that? I could read anything I wanted. No restriction.

[Sceptic]

The only made up stuff I love has to be very creative--not geared to youngsters.

The later books in the Harry Potter series are more adult. I do find JK Rowling a little overrated all the same but then the British public have simply always liked cliches. Still, JK Rowling is cliche with some style in my view.

[Brother of Karl]

Frankly the books/films just bugged me because they were generic tropes badly written but well marketed

That misses the whole point. Clearly the Harry Potter books weren't a part of your childhood. As a children's book, it served as my introduction to a lot of these "generic" tropes. It was more than just the marketing. The books had mass appeal for a whole generation. Partly, Rowling just happened to be in the right place at the right time, but her work still stood above all the rest in some way.