Comments on: Tolkien and Rowling: A Case for “Text Only”

By: Bobbie

Bobbie — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:40:50 +0000

At last! Something clear I can undersantd. Thanks!

By: Cheryl Hamilton

Cheryl Hamilton — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 14:16:27 +0000

Sounds like someone speaketh with forked tone.

By: Jacquie Kaminetzky

Jacquie Kaminetzky — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:40:57 +0000

I’m not sure exactly why but this web site is loading very slow for me. Is anyone else having this issue or is it a issue on my end? I’ll check back later and see if the problem still exists.

By: Hogwarts Professor · HogPro Mailbag: On Death and Hogwarts Paintings

Hogwarts Professor · HogPro Mailbag: On Death and Hogwarts Paintings — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:03:08 +0000

[...] subject of portraits and their relationship with whom they portray, a subject never explored within the seven book canon (see below). I’m not sure whether her answer is especially satisfying but it is where one [...]

By: Arabella Figg

Arabella Figg — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:43:01 +0000

Inked, I agree with you. I think in creating her backstory for Dumbledore, Rowling was looking at the structure of the pine tree–his influences and motivations. I doubt she combed through such needles as whether he was a vigin (high ick factor there). Although, she did consider his favorite candies–appropriate for kids and plenty of fun choices for office passwords.

Obsessive question, smart answer.

Re trees and needles, the kitties’ fave season approaches…

By: inked

inked — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 03:40:14 +0000

Though Rowling may have refused an answer for “fear of fandom’s reaction”,
I highly doubt it. It is not as though the sale of her next HP book or HP-related book would ever suffer from alleging that Dumbie was not a virgin.

I think she never really thought about it. It probably took all her restraint to not reply loudly “Is sex all you people ever think about? There’s a world that needs lots of help out there! HELLO! Get a life!”

That she didn’t burst out laughing was a remarkable feat of self-control. Fixation on one’s coffee does sometimes tide one over ignorant stupidities in progress without further embarrassing the ignorant.

I think Melissa may have missed the whole point of the snogging episodes………….

By: SeaJay

SeaJay — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:32:30 +0000

Red Rocker, yes I forgot to think through the implications of any other response !

By: Red Rocker

Red Rocker — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:52:44 +0000

SeaJay, that is an intriguing theory. But in this case I think there are other considerations. To wit: imagine fandom’s response if JKR had acknowledged that Dumbledore had ever had sex. It would not have been pleasant. It’s one thing to lust quietly in your heart over your best friend, it’s quite another to act on your feelings. It would have put Dumbledore over the line for many people who can currently say: well, it was an adolescent infatuation and it’s not like he ever didanything about it.

By: SeaJay

SeaJay — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:29:34 +0000

I was intrigued by this quote from ‘Harry a History” (page 327) which seems to indicate that even the author is not privy to all her own characters’ back-stories.

When talking about Dumbledore’s sexuality (yes I know…), Jo, in response to a question from Melissa:

“Does that mean he (Dumbledore) was a one hundred-fifty-year-old virgin? I don’t know” she said softly, peering into her coffee cup as though it held the answer.

By: Steve Morrison

Steve Morrison — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:19:30 +0000

Hello, everyone!

Here are a couple of additional links discussing the question of “canonicity” for Tolkien’s books:

http://tolkien.slimy.com/faq/External.html#Canon
http://tolkien.slimy.com/essays/TolkParish.html

As you can see, there is hardly any agreement in Tolkien fandom about what constitutes canon. Although revgeorge did speak of Tolkien “scholarship”, rather than “fandom”; I honestly have no idea what, e.g., Tom Shippey or Verlyn Flieger would say on the subject.

Personally, I do draw a distinction between what I consider canon when thinking in “fandom” mode and what I accept as canon when in “literary analysis” mode. That is, if I’m taking part in one of the unending arguments about how Sauron retrieved the Ring from the downfall of Númenor or how Snape entered Hogwarts to consult Dumbledore’s portrait while he was a wanted man, I do consider the author’s extra-textual statements to be valid – as long as they don’t contradict the text or each other! But when looking for deeper meanings in any book, I consider the author to be, at best, primum inter pares.