I don’t like it when a new author twists old characters. I saw the movie…now I forget the name of it…based on Jane Austen herself. I got home and intrigued, researched her past. Her past was vaguely similar to the movie, but the movie took liberties and stretched the imagination. The truth is no one really knows about Jane’s romantic life. And for some reason, I was really let down! I hated that someone first of all, completed twisted someone’s life. And second of all, that we actually know very little about her life.

This isn’t very different to how I feel about book characters. I have seen a book that is supposed to be about Rhett Butler. What? How can anyone but the true author who created Rhett Butler know anything about him?

About the actual topic. I’ve always felt that the characters are the writer’s when they are writing them, but the moment they give them up that’s when it the characters stop being theirs. To me this is why sequels and series are hard to write. One “out of character” action and you’ve lost your readers. Worst is that most times (with series at least) it just feels like your beating a dead horse and not giving the reader something new that will keep them in love with the character.

I’ve read a few Jane Austen books, and they’ve been good. Love Carrie Bebris’ Mr. and Mrs. Darcy mysteries.:cool: I didn’t read Scarlett. Just wasn’t interested.

Movie studios and publishers often have a large say in what the public consumes. Great if we like it, but are we shortchanging the authors, scriptwriters and directors if we don’t let them have their say about what the book or movie could/should have conveyed?

Where does art end? With its conception? With its unveiling to the public? With the fans who carry it beyond? I personally like living art that can morph with the reader, with the fan base, or with the author.

As for the gay issue, we’re exposed to people being “outed” all the time. Some catch you by surprise, some don’t. If all you can see is the image of that person getting it on with someone of the same sex after the announcement, then that’s a personal issue that goes way beyond the question of how much do we want or need to know about a character’s “life.” For me, it adds a depth and richness that, should I care to reread the books, will perhaps add a layer that I wouldn’t have seen otherwise. Or I can ignore it altogether. Eye of the beholder, and all…

More generally, I think it’s interesting to hear authors talking about their work and answering questions. It’s one of the things I enjoy about the internet – reading behind-the-scenes snippets from authors – perhaps about why they changed a name, or deleted a scene, or came to write a character. It’s like the deleted scenes on a DVD – they aren’t part of the work, but I often enjoy watching them.

The subject came up previously as stated when direction was needed for character arc in filming of HPOP.

JKR was on a cross country american tour specifically TO answer fam questions. Her stops were jam packed with audiences of kids who had WON tickets to her readings and WON personally autographed books. JKR made a special point to stop in NOLA and do a signing for Katrina affected school children.

Since you haven’t read the last book, which has a strong theme of lost love that yet endures in both the storylines of Dumbledore and Snape, I’ll leave a spoiler bit so you can decide whether or not you wish to read on.

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))SPOILER(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

This understanding of love that is not returned is key to understanding why Dumbledore and Snape become so close.
Snape makes it possible for Harry to live… and Snape actually is the character voice used to express outrage over the path Dumbledore chose for Harry.

Snapes angry line to Dumbledore about Dumbledore fattening Harry as a pig for slaughter or raising Harry only to be killed is perhaps one of the most likeable Snape moments in the books. Snape actions were to preserve Lilys son’s life no matter what was required of him. Snapes patronus made me sniffle. And I’m not a big Snape fan.

JKR wrote a moving tribute to a flawed love that exists whether or not it is returned when she wrote the Snape story. And Dumbledore’s story of his love in his youth and his love of power which directly led to the death of his sister and the breakup of his family then led Dumbldore to a life long attempt at repentence to do right and a battle against the evil wrought by his one true love does much to explain WHY Dumbledore trusted Snape as he did.

Dumbledore actually had to defeat his one true love in battle. Dumbledore was the only one who could defeat G.
Otherwise a key point in the Hallow subplot doesn’t work.

No there wasn’t an actual sex scene with Dumbledore. There aren’t actual sex scenes with any of the characters, just a lot of snogging and jokes about whether or not Harry has a tatoo like Ginnny says he does.

Dumbledore is referrred to in the tabloids in HPDH as having an unnatural interest in Harry…and his relationship with G is referred to in loaded terms by people interviewed in his bio for that book including G’s aunt and by his bro Albus.

I guess we’ll see what a court of law thinks about JKRs right to her world and characters as she is suing over a proposed wiki on Potter world.

JKR didn’t just pull this out of her hat…this early love is a plot point that ties major story arcs together in a way that allows redemption and love to triumph.

The hard lessons Dumbledore learned about power and his own bigotry and loving the wrong person for you, and thus you the reader learn why Dumbledore never wanted to be head of the Ministry and why Dumldedore cried when he slipped on the cursed ring and what Dumbledores biggest failure was. And why Dumbledore so vividly understood the lure of the Mirror of Erised.

I think the way the news was conveyed in the media dramatized JKR remarks. I couldn’t believe the difference of what JKR actually said in transcripts and the way it was reported on the news. ..and that’s muddied the water of discussion on the issue, imho.

I thought she did an amazing job of redemption on the final book.
Course I kinda thought Luna would marry Dean or Neville, but hey…at least we know she did get married. Didn’t get why Teddy wasn’t living with Harry and Ginny, either.

I think it’s a pretty powerful statement that readers (or movie-goers) will have such strong reactions to a character. It means that character has come to life. So, whatever people say, I think Ms. Rowlings has the right to feel mighty satisfied with the work she’s done as an author.:wink: And I don’t even like her stories.:mrgreen:

But she made revelations about other characters on the same day, including the answer to the question “Did Neville ever find love?” For some reason, the media choose to focus on the answer to the question about Dumbledore.

I know that Jenny Crusie’s mentioned that some secondary characters got married (ones for whom she’d planned a sequel which was never written). As Jules mentioned, the Silmarillion is full of extra details that Tolkein didn’t have space/time to include in his novels. Eloisa James writes little extras for her readers, in response to them saying which things they’d like to know more about. Julia Quinn wrote some “second epilogues” for some of her novels. So it seems to me that revealing extra details about characters is really pretty common. It’s the same as the extras you get in “director’s cut” versions of films. I can understand that some readers might not like this/don’t want to know more than what’s in the original version, but I don’t think Rowling’s done anything particularly unusual.