JK Rowling's Literary Offenses

[sunnyskywalker]

If these have been posted here before, it must have been a while, so I'm sure a review will still be interesting.

The Well-Tempered Plot Device, which has this interesting analysis of a bad book's plot:

"It would be much too complicated to have three goodies overcome the whole usurping army, or at any rate it would be far beyond the plotting powers of a Lin Carter. So what you do instead is write into the scenario one or more Plot Coupons which happen to be 'supernaturally' linked to the outcome of the larger action; and then all your character have to do is save up the tokens till it's time to cash them in."

*coughcough* Deathly Hallows, anyone? Did becoming the "Master of Death," ie (according to Dumbledore) being unafraid to die, actually result from Harry possessing the stone and the cloak and technically being master of the Elder Wand? And I think that grabbing Draco's wand, which is supernaturally linked to the Elder Wand even though we've never had any indication that wands communicate before, causing the Elder Wand not want to shoot Harry and turn back on Voldemort counts as a vague supernatural link which works by authorial fiat. (I'll let the Horcruxes slide, because they are actually bits of Voldemort and it's pretty clear how killing bits of someone could directly lead to that person's death.)

Next, Fenimore Cooper's Literary Offenses is Mark Twain's very own Deathtocapslock post. I thought some of his "rules governing literary art in domain of romantic fiction" were particularly appropriate here:

1. That a tale shall accomplish something and arrive somewhere. Well, Harry does kill Voldemort, which is accomplishing something, but we've discussed how otherwise basically nothing changes in the wizarding world.

2. They require that the episodes in a tale shall be necessary parts of the tale, and shall help to develop it. House-elf rights, Deathly Hallows, Ludo Bagman, Florean Fortescue... put all the subplots which turned out to go absolutely nowhere and contribute almost nothing to the plot here.

4. They require that the personages in a tale, both dead and alive, shall exhibit a sufficient excuse for being there. Hi, Tonks. Insert all the other characters who don't seem to contribute much relative to their screentime here.

6. They require that when the author describes the character of a personage in the tale, the conduct and conversation of that personage shall justify said description. I think you guys have this one covered...

And many of the other rules make me think that JK Rowling and Fenimore Cooper must have some writing tricks in common. We could probably put together our own, Harry Potter version of the list quite easily.

Comments

[sunnyskywalker]

I think some plot coupons and McGuffins work quite well myself (and it isn't like real people don't ever need to collect anything - although usually for us having the Three Whatsits of Fate does not help at all except maybe for morale). I'm not bothered by the One Ring because it isn't like the Valar will just step in and help whoever has the jewelry - it has powers of its own, and Sauron actually tied himself to it, so it's clear what the effect of destroying it is. But I did find The Dark Is Rising annoying for that reason before I ever heard of this guy - they've collected these thingies, and so can pull a silver leaf off a tree before someone else does, which... loads the dice in their favor at some indefinite future time? I'm still not clear on what, exactly, they accomplished.

Definitely a natural storyteller. I think her ability to create something so fascinating that I want to keep analyzing it despite all the parts that I don't like is incredible. It's such a shame that she didn't take a little more time or accept a little more editorial guidance or something to clean up a few more of the rougher points. There's a lot of things I think wouldn't be problems with just a tiny bit of tweaking.

[oryx_leucoryx]

A big part is that she didn't try to think what happens in her world when Harry Potter isn't looking. No sense of history, no sense of a society that most of the time works.

[sunnyskywalker]

She did say once she didn't consider herself a fantasy writer. So she jumped into it without having any idea about worldbuilding (doesn't have to be the focus, but you still have to do it to make the setting consistent). And I suspect she doesn't care.

[charlottehywd.livejournal.com]

I concur with the storyteller thing. There are many, many things that bother me about the series, yet somehow I find myself drawn to analyze them more. Perhaps it's because if she had really thought out some of the moral implications, it could have really been a great series.