CCBC-Net Archives
Harry Potter
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: June Cummins <jcummins>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 11:33:04 -0800 (PST)
I think that indeed we were set up to realize that Ron's and Hermione's skills were essential when they were going through the trials. In fact, just last week when I was teaching Harry Potter to my college students, I used Ron's chess-playing prowess as an example of a certain kind of foreshadowing. At least two references are made to Ron's skills at playing chess. Pointedly, one incident has Harry losing a game to Ron. This sets up not only that Ron's skills will be necessary to Harry gaining access to the philosopher's stone, but that Harry could not have made it there himself--he needed Ron. Similarly, with Hermione, her ability to reason through a logic problem quickly and correctly is certainly well established--she is the smartest, quickest student in the class.
As for arbitrary, I did get a sense that the first book did use magic somewhat arbitrarily near the beginning. When Harry was in the zoo, and the snake started talking to him, I was disappointed as this seemed
"glommed on." Even my young sons thought this was silly. We actually stopped reading the book at this point, and I haughtily told a few friends that I thought the magic was "inorganic." These friends encouraged us to keep reading, which we did, and I am so happy that we did. Of course, the explanation and development of Harry's ability to talk to snakes does not come until the _second_ book of the series. It's clear that many references are made in the first few books that don't become significant until later in the series. There are some foreshadows and references buried in the first three books right now that are completely unknown to us. (An example: for those of you who have read the third book--which I myself have only read a third of--did you pick up on the fact that the name Sirius Black comes up in the very beginning of the first book? Go back and look.) Because Rowling perceives the series not as seven separate books but as an ongoing novel divided into sections (much like Proust's magnum opus), it is inevitable that some things are not going to come to light until later on.
The thing about unicorns and centaurs, though--I have to think about that one. I did not realize that these two creatures don't normally come up in the same kind of literature. Did that jar other readers?
June Cummins
_______________________________________________________ June Cummins, Assistant Professor Department of English and Comparative Literature San Diego State University jcummins at mail.sdsu.edu
Received on Thu 11 Nov 1999 01:33:04 PM CST
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 11:33:04 -0800 (PST)
I think that indeed we were set up to realize that Ron's and Hermione's skills were essential when they were going through the trials. In fact, just last week when I was teaching Harry Potter to my college students, I used Ron's chess-playing prowess as an example of a certain kind of foreshadowing. At least two references are made to Ron's skills at playing chess. Pointedly, one incident has Harry losing a game to Ron. This sets up not only that Ron's skills will be necessary to Harry gaining access to the philosopher's stone, but that Harry could not have made it there himself--he needed Ron. Similarly, with Hermione, her ability to reason through a logic problem quickly and correctly is certainly well established--she is the smartest, quickest student in the class.
As for arbitrary, I did get a sense that the first book did use magic somewhat arbitrarily near the beginning. When Harry was in the zoo, and the snake started talking to him, I was disappointed as this seemed
"glommed on." Even my young sons thought this was silly. We actually stopped reading the book at this point, and I haughtily told a few friends that I thought the magic was "inorganic." These friends encouraged us to keep reading, which we did, and I am so happy that we did. Of course, the explanation and development of Harry's ability to talk to snakes does not come until the _second_ book of the series. It's clear that many references are made in the first few books that don't become significant until later in the series. There are some foreshadows and references buried in the first three books right now that are completely unknown to us. (An example: for those of you who have read the third book--which I myself have only read a third of--did you pick up on the fact that the name Sirius Black comes up in the very beginning of the first book? Go back and look.) Because Rowling perceives the series not as seven separate books but as an ongoing novel divided into sections (much like Proust's magnum opus), it is inevitable that some things are not going to come to light until later on.
The thing about unicorns and centaurs, though--I have to think about that one. I did not realize that these two creatures don't normally come up in the same kind of literature. Did that jar other readers?
June Cummins
_______________________________________________________ June Cummins, Assistant Professor Department of English and Comparative Literature San Diego State University jcummins at mail.sdsu.edu
Received on Thu 11 Nov 1999 01:33:04 PM CST
