Entry tags:
On authors and their own work
I came across this in an article I was reading this morning and thought it had some relevance to the 'JKR's word as canon' debate.
I am inclined to agree with C. S. Lewis who commented on his own book, Till We Have Faces, : "An author doesn't necessarily understand the meaning of his own story better than anyone else..." The act of creation confers no special privileges on authors when it comes to the distinctly different, if lesser, task of interpretation. Wordsworth the critic is not in the same league with Wordsworth the poet, while Samuel Johnson the critic towers over Johnson the creative artist. Authors obviously have something in mind when they write, but a work of historical or theological or aesthetic imagination has a life of its own.
no subject
I like this distinction here - which is why I have a lot more respect for JKR's creations rather than her intereviews. There's something that happens in the process of writing that is a little magical - it's very different from answering questions in a Q&A format. I do think that if JKR set out to write Harry as an Auror at 17 she would start making subtle differences to the story - to his character. It just happens. Harry would turn around and tell her he was tired of being responsible or that he missed Quidditch or he just wanted to make sure Ginny was okay. Who knows? The act of writing would help her figure that out.
She's too close (both in the time since she's written it and to the subject matter itself) to do her own analyzing - the things she's thought about - like death and evil and Snape, I think she could give you a fairly good analysis. The things that she hasn't thought about - like what Ron would be doing in twenty years or what economic system the goblins are representing in DH - someone else would probably do a better job with it. And I don't think JKR would really care to tell you the truth. Ron's job or goblin economics weren't compelling to her then, and probably aren't now. :)
no subject