desperance: (Default)
[personal profile] desperance
Hmph. So Rowling says Dumbledore is gay. After all the books and all the reviews are written, after all the fuss is over, she trots this out.

Two things. If this is the case, it really shouldn't need saying, surely? It should have become evident, it should be at least inherent if not explicit somewhere in that vasty text. If it's not there to be read or interpreted, then it's not material and it really doesn't need saying. It either matters, or it doesn't; if it matters it needs to be there, and if it doesn't matter then who needs to know? Etc. That old phrase "show, don't tell" comes bubbling to mind; if she has to out him after the series is finished, then she hasn't done it right.

Also, I'm unimpressed by her choosing to do it now, at this cold dead end of all the hoo-ha. While the books were still happening, it might have been significant, even if only of a creative failure; now it feels both morbidly cautious and somewhat cynical, as though a final poke at the cooling ashes might ignite just a little more media glow.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-10-21 11:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] desperance.livejournal.com
Ye-es - but if their relationship to the text is changed by something the author has to say outwith the text, then I don't believe the text is working as it should.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-10-24 04:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] esmeraldus-neo.livejournal.com
You might be right.

I'm becoming quite an Umberto Eco disciple lately, and he says that novels are machines for generating interpretations.

I suppose, one could argue that if the machine needs to be helped along, then it is a slightly flawed design.

Profile

desperance: (Default)
desperance

November 2017

S M T W T F S
   1 234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags