The lore of the books was kinda already established... in the books.
Unless she wants to rewrite and republish an amended version, I'mma ignore her tweets as nothing more than that - tweets.
If a traditional artist creates a piece of artwork and submits it to a gallery, they can't very well come back in and repaint it.
...Maybe they should though, because that would be super entertaining to see happen and the repercussions of such, lol!
The lore of the books was kinda already established... in the books.
Unless she wants to rewrite and republish an amended version, I'mma ignore her tweets as nothing more than that - tweets.
If a traditional artist creates a piece of artwork and submits it to a gallery, they can't very well come back in and repaint it.
...Maybe they should though, because that would be super entertaining to see happen and the repercussions of such, lol!
I think the real problem here is that she tweeted witches and wizards used to "relieve themselves where they stood" and then "vanish the evidence" afterwards
I think the real problem here is that she tweeted witches and wizards used to "relieve themselves where they stood" and then "vanish the evidence" afterwards
See, the thing is, from a writer's point of view... there's something that needs to be considered.
For one, not every aspect of a character's life is ever seen in a book, especially one where the focus is on one particular character. Harry Potter has a huge cast, so lots of characters have backstories, opinions and whatever else nobody gets to see. There are lots of details of people's lives we never see IRL, so there are going to be things about characters that are never showcased in the books.
That said... why is she even telling us? What purpose does that serve?
Dumbledore... fair enough, it makes sense with him. Him being gay does have an impact on how he reacted to Grindelwald and so on, because he obviously adored him and attraction can make otherwise clever people do stupid, stupid things.
Anything beyond that, though..? Unless it's explicit in the text, it's probably not needed. It's fine to plan for characters more than the readers will see. If there's a detail of their lives that affects how they act... sure, you'll have that in the notes. I do with my own characters. But my readers don't need to know until it becomes relevant.
So I don't know why she's imparting all of this knowledge when it's over, she should just keep it to herself. It's unimportant, unless she's trying to retroactively and hamfistedly bring in the representation. It's not needed.
She needs to wind her neck in.
See, the thing is, from a writer's point of view... there's something that needs to be considered.
For one, not every aspect of a character's life is ever seen in a book, especially one where the focus is on one particular character. Harry Potter has a huge cast, so lots of characters have backstories, opinions and whatever else nobody gets to see. There are lots of details of people's lives we never see IRL, so there are going to be things about characters that are never showcased in the books.
That said... why is she even telling us? What purpose does that serve?
Dumbledore... fair enough, it makes sense with him. Him being gay does have an impact on how he reacted to Grindelwald and so on, because he obviously adored him and attraction can make otherwise clever people do stupid, stupid things.
Anything beyond that, though..? Unless it's explicit in the text, it's probably not needed. It's fine to plan for characters more than the readers will see. If there's a detail of their lives that affects how they act... sure, you'll have that in the notes. I do with my own characters. But my readers don't need to know until it becomes relevant.
So I don't know why she's imparting all of this knowledge when it's over, she should just keep it to herself. It's unimportant, unless she's trying to retroactively and hamfistedly bring in the representation. It's not needed.
She needs to wind her neck in.
UK time. Sorry for timezone-related delays in responses. They/Them.
sad :( I really idolized her as a kid, but the combo of her lack to commit to lgbt and poc characters in source material, and her getting heavy into trans exclusionary circles, its become rather sad.
sad :( I really idolized her as a kid, but the combo of her lack to commit to lgbt and poc characters in source material, and her getting heavy into trans exclusionary circles, its become rather sad.
[quote name="Hawktalon" date="2019-07-19 12:13:24" ]
Honestly, I probably wouldn't have such a problem if she'd just stop trying so hard. She's never going to be intersectional unless she takes a good hard look at herself and her worldview, which I don't think will happen any time soon. Being fake inclusive is worse than being honest about your exclusionism.
[/quote]
You said this so well! She keeps going halfway and not actually following through and it's embarrassing to watch. I like the HP books still, great fantasy, but Rowling should probably just own up to the fact that it's very representative of herself and her worldview, and if she wants to improve at that (she should :P) she should take some time, talk to people, do research and write something new. She's such a big name, some humble pie and actual learning would be so good!
Hawktalon wrote on 2019-07-19 12:13:24:
Honestly, I probably wouldn't have such a problem if she'd just stop trying so hard. She's never going to be intersectional unless she takes a good hard look at herself and her worldview, which I don't think will happen any time soon. Being fake inclusive is worse than being honest about your exclusionism.
You said this so well! She keeps going halfway and not actually following through and it's embarrassing to watch. I like the HP books still, great fantasy, but Rowling should probably just own up to the fact that it's very representative of herself and her worldview, and if she wants to improve at that (she should :P) she should take some time, talk to people, do research and write something new. She's such a big name, some humble pie and actual learning would be so good!
Attention grabbing. She just wants good girl points for being woke. That's all there is to it.
I'll gladly eat my words when she actually writes a book with all of this stuff in it. As it is, all of this "expanded lore" is pretty much worthless.
Attention grabbing. She just wants good girl points for being woke. That's all there is to it.
I'll gladly eat my words when she actually writes a book with all of this stuff in it. As it is, all of this "expanded lore" is pretty much worthless.
nothing more for the franchise should have been wrote after deathly hallows was published. it's hard to respect her now and its ruined her reputation but the memes and stuff about it have been really funny so its not all bad. when will she confirm trans hagrid already? i'm waiting
nothing more for the franchise should have been wrote after deathly hallows was published. it's hard to respect her now and its ruined her reputation but the memes and stuff about it have been really funny so its not all bad. when will she confirm trans hagrid already? i'm waiting
She may be saying and posting things that seem inclusive, but her actions say otherwise.
As much as I enjoyed Harry Potter as a kid, I can't support someone who listens to and actively spreads misinformation about people like me.
She may be saying and posting things that seem inclusive, but her actions say otherwise.
As much as I enjoyed Harry Potter as a kid, I can't support someone who listens to and actively spreads misinformation about people like me.
He/Him or They/Them
I like D&D Worldbuilding
My take is that retrospective inclusivity doesn't "count". If you wanna be inclusive, do it from the start. Don't retcon a bunch of changes that often directly contradict established canon just for "woke points". It's frankly insulting.
Fact of the matter is, whether she's genuine or not, at this point it just feels like she's doing it for attention. It doesn't feel candid, or meaningful. It feels like a shallow cash-grab, like she's trying to monetise inclusivity and quelling anything that doesn't further her own ends. That's... what it looks like. I dunno if that's really her intention, but regardless of the purpose - she really needs to reassess her priorities before she loses every fan she has left.
My take is that retrospective inclusivity doesn't "count". If you wanna be inclusive, do it from the start. Don't retcon a bunch of changes that often directly contradict established canon just for "woke points". It's frankly insulting.
Fact of the matter is, whether she's genuine or not, at this point it just feels like she's doing it for attention. It doesn't feel candid, or meaningful. It feels like a shallow cash-grab, like she's trying to monetise inclusivity and quelling anything that doesn't further her own ends. That's... what it looks like. I dunno if that's really her intention, but regardless of the purpose - she really needs to reassess her priorities before she loses every fan she has left.
[quote name="Charias" date="2019-07-20 15:00:13" ]
My take is that retrospective inclusivity doesn't "count". If you wanna be inclusive, do it from the start. Don't retcon a bunch of changes that often directly contradict established canon just for "woke points". It's frankly insulting.
Fact of the matter is, whether she's genuine or not, at this point it just feels like she's doing it for attention. It doesn't feel candid, or meaningful. It feels like a shallow cash-grab, like she's trying to monetise inclusivity and quelling anything that doesn't further her own ends. That's... what it looks like. I dunno if that's really her intention, but regardless of the purpose - she really needs to reassess her priorities before she loses every fan she has left.
[/quote]
^this. It just kinda screams "Look, look! I'm being inclusive to the El Gee Bee Tee, too!".
Charias wrote on 2019-07-20 15:00:13:
My take is that retrospective inclusivity doesn't "count". If you wanna be inclusive, do it from the start. Don't retcon a bunch of changes that often directly contradict established canon just for "woke points". It's frankly insulting.
Fact of the matter is, whether she's genuine or not, at this point it just feels like she's doing it for attention. It doesn't feel candid, or meaningful. It feels like a shallow cash-grab, like she's trying to monetise inclusivity and quelling anything that doesn't further her own ends. That's... what it looks like. I dunno if that's really her intention, but regardless of the purpose - she really needs to reassess her priorities before she loses every fan she has left.
^this. It just kinda screams "Look, look! I'm being inclusive to the El Gee Bee Tee, too!".
Tell me your desire
while you pull me from the fire
and we'll seal the deal with a kiss
