Kate Stringer |
One of the reasons I’m an English major is because of these words from literature’s wisest character, Albus Dumbledore:
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?”
For me, there’s no such thing as “just a story.” Every fictional tale is as real as its reader’s imagination allows it to be.
That’s why, this morning, I had a literary existential crisis.
In an interview with Wonderland Magazine, to be published Feb. 7, Rowling questions her choice of making Ron and Hermione wedded soulmates. The Sunday Times published clips of the interview Feb. 2, with the headline “JK admits Harry should have wed Hermione.”
“I wrote the Hermione/Ron relationship as a form of wish fulfillment,” Rowling said. “That’s how it was conceived, really. For reasons that have very little to do with literature and far more to do with me clinging to the plot as I first imagined it, Hermione ended up with Ron.”
I relayed the information to my fellow Harry Potter worshipping friend. She was devastated. At first I assumed she was just one of the many J.K. Rowling predicted would be furious at the upturning of a beloved plot line.
“I know, I’m sorry,” Rowling said. “I can hear the rage and fury it might cause some fans, but if I’m absolutely honest, distance has given me perspective on that. It was a choice I made for very personal reasons, not for reasons of credibility. Am I breaking people’s hearts by saying this? I hope not.”
But then my friend questioned what this meant in the Harry Potter universe.
“Is [Hermione] less happy then? Does she have feelings for Harry? Does Harry even care?” she asked me over a heated Potter texting debate.
My initial surprise at Rowling’s announcement turned to panic.
What are we to make of the characters standing on platform 9 and ¾ in Rowling’s epilogue? As they wave good bye to their children, are they masking resentment, hiding an affair, bitter at the plotlines their maker admits was a choice of “wish fulfillment” rather than literary genius?
Or does Rowling’s announcement even matter?
Afterall, the author and reader share a unique ownership of a book. On the one hand, the author invents the world, spending years stitching storylines together. But without the reader, Harry Potter wouldn’t exist. The reader’s loyalty gives life to otherwise dead paper and ink, honoring the story in the halls of her imagination.
So if an author makes a statement about a book seven years after it is published, what are we supposed to believe? Her words, or our imagination?
I don’t know how I feel about Rowling’s statement. I don’t know what questions will go through my head the next time I pick up Harry Potter and dive back into a world that I’ve loved and believed in for 12 years.
But I love that an author is willing to have an honest conversation about her characters years after she’s put down the pen. And I encourage all her fans, those furious, confused, ecstatic or skeptical about the announcement, to continue in dialogue with her.
Because Harry Potter is our story too.
