Ms. Rowling TLC PotterCast, Part 1

The first part of Ms. Rowling’s interview at The Leaky Cauldron is online already but I will wait to comment until the transcript goes up at TLC or Madame Pince’s Potter Pages. If you have iTunes on your computer and have listened to the show, please offer your thoughts here. The posted Table of Contents for the “landmark show” is:

-The morals of Beedle the Bard
-Who was right about Horcri?
-Who made the first Horcrux?
-Creating a Horcrux vs. splitting the atom
-Will Jo tell us how to create a Horcrux?
-The things that made her editor look like she wanted to vomit
-The Scottish Book and its potential date of publication
-Baby pictures for the Dawlish entry
-Dumbledore and homosexuality in the wizarding world
-The recklessness and blindness that comes with love
-Madam Hooch fanfic
-Is Harry kinda not really a Horcrux?
-Was Harry the not-so-much-a Horcrux damaged in CoS?
-The pain in Harry’s scar explained in more detail
-Dumbledore’s “in essence divided” spell
-Neville. Just Neville. The Boy it Could Have Been.
-Matthew Lewis as Cormac McLaggen?
-Thrice defying the Dark Lord explained
-The missing 24 hours, and how Dumbledore found out what happened in Godric’s Hollow
-“You either get to be right, or you get more stories!”
-“I’ve got a bit of a problem with this myself…maybe they’ve got a point.”
-How the Scottish Book would be laid out, and more info about what will be in it
-“It’s about doing the absolute definitive, giving people everything guide.”
-Hannah Abbott’s backstory: Muggleborn or pureblood? And running the Leaky Cauldron
-The Web site and the WOMBATs – are there more WOMBATs? The secret agenda that got book seven info online.
-Jo: “I win!”
-The Trio: Did they graduate Hogwarts?
-Hogwarts graduation traditions, and Jo’s feelings on not writing a ceremony

I look forward to reading your thoughts on Ms. Rowling’s direct media contact with Fandom, something of a first, I imagine, for a writer or celebrity of this magnitude. Or not?


  1. revgeorge wrote on another thread:

    Well, listened to the Pottercast interview with JKR this morning. It answered some important questions like how was Mrs. Longbottom able to take out Dawlish so easily & why Helga Hufflepuff did not enslave the Hogwarts’ house elves.

    I guess she did talk about some minor stuff, too, like Dumbledore’s sexuality. What I thought came off most in that discussion was that the issue of Dumbledore’s sexuality was never a really big deal for Jo & that it wasn’t all that important to the plot of the books. Which is why, as she indicated, you had to read it into the books. I think that part of the interview was very well done & certainly does not come off as a rousing endorsement of gay rights. She was simply answering a question put to her honestly. So, just my thoughts on it.

  2. JohnABaptist says

    What I found fascinating, and hope will someday be accomplished, is Rowling’s dream of publishing her “Scottish Text” [encyclopedia] in the form of a parallel corpora, that is to say in parallel texts with the left-hand page treating a person, incident or object as if it had really existed in our world; while the facing page admits that it was, in fact, a fictional creation and translates the text into the processes, decisions and trade-offs that occurred during its gestation.

    That in itself would take the project out of the “can’t let go of the Muse” category and potentially give us one of the most powerful texts on fiction writing ever produced. Something that might ultimately prove more valuable than the Potter Saga itself.

    Ahhhh! The dream goes on! Rowling has managed to come through again! I have something to eagerly await for the next decade.

    Now quick, everyone, stop bothering her with foolish questions and let her get on with it.

  3. Er, shouldn’t that word be “Horcruces”?

  4. A summary of the “new canon” elements from the PotterCast is up at Madame Pince’s Potter Pages! Thank you, Roonwit.

    The most interesting parts I thought were on Harry-as-Horcrux:

    # Harry isn’t really a Horcrux, which needs to be made intentionally. He wasn’t an evil object with curses on him, and wasn’t contaminated by it except on occasions in OotP when it fed off the dark time Harry was going through.
    # Harry’s scar hurts when the soul piece in him is drawn back to the master piece of soul in Voldemort
    # The scar is the wound through which the soul piece found its way into Harry.
    # The two-headed smoke snake was Dumbledore detecting that Voldemort’s soul had split like this.
    # Harry had to die to get rid of the soul piece in him, being poisoned by the basilisk but cured wasn’t enough.

    So, both sides of Harry as Horcrux were correct, it seems; he was and he wasn’t. I can live with that.

  5. I was almost afraid to listen, but I couldn’t help myself and I found, much to my relief, that I thoroughly enjoyed hearing Jo talk about the books and the characters. I was quite glad to hear this particular explanation of just what that Horcrux in Harry’s head was. While it was a piece of Voldemort’s soul as many thought, it went along with my reading of it that it wasn’t intentional, so in the strict sense, it wasn’t technically a Horcrux. The idea that a Horcrux could be casually and easily made was one that always bothered me. So I think we all did get the best of both sides of that discussion in her answer. I also like her comment that when Harry’s scar was hurting him it was because that errant piece of Voldemort’s soul wanted to return to Voldemort.

    I do wish, though, that, entertaining as it was listening to the three of them chat with Jo about the books, they (Melissa, John, and Sue) would learn to really stay a bit more focused and ask some questions that haven’t been asked over and over (enough with the shipping already!). The most interesting interview of late is the one from Canada where she was asked–and answered–questions about her own relgious background. Interesting for the insights it gives us into the books, but also because it’s something we haven’t already heard.

    It doesn’t always have to be a question about religion–far from it. I did like that they brought up the missing 24 hours when Harry was being brought to Privet Drive and her answer about how Dumbledore knew what had happened, even though he was not the Secret Keeper. It was also interesting to me that JKR would be able to answer that question that some people really want to know, and that’s how a Horcrux is created. I liked it that she really hedged on giving the full explanation of the process, though it sounds like it is something she has thought through–it shows, to me, that she does have a very strong moral basis for the books and there are some things that, while they might be interesting, are not really something that people need to know. Sort of along the lines of what we are told about Dumbledore in the first book, that he is powerful enough to do the kind of magic that Voldemort does, but that he is too noble to do it–he makes proper choices, which also relates to what we learn of his background in Deathly Hallows.

    I really hope she keeps to that one (not giving all the details about making a Horcrux)–in some instances, our own imaginations are the best answer; the reader can go as far (or not) as he wants in supplying the details of Horcrux creation (hmmm, nice oxymoron there–since it’s really soul destruction). I hope for some of the details, even when Rowling writes the “Scottish Book” (cute reference, btw) that she will leave some of the mystery intact.

    Anyway, I’m looking forward to the next half of the interview/conversation next week. Maybe they’ll get to some of the things I would like to hear about, besides who ends up with whom. (Can you tell I just don’t really care? *grin*)


  6. Arabella Figg says

    I enjoyed these points, too:

    • Neville is the-boy-it-could-have-been. Harry has an edge more talent, particularly an instinct of the right thing to do which makes him such a good Auror, but Neville proves by the end of the books that he could also have done it had Voldemort chosen him.

    • Harry and Ron didn’t go back to school and were Aurors, but Hermione did another Hogwarts to get her NEWTs.

    Hooray for Neville!. But could Neville have gotten to the skill level he did without Harry’s help and DA instruction? Don’t think so.

    It’s hard to imagine after the adult fire of the Deathly Hallows year that someone would want to go back to Hogwarts (essentially high school) to do their last year, but I can see Hermione doing that. I felt throughout DH that it cost her something the others couldn’t possibly appreciate. I wonder if she was Head Girl.

    I’m definitely not Head Girl around here, as bossy Fullatricks can tell you…

  7. Arabella Figg says

    I forgot to add that Jo’s comment about Neville demonstrates again the element of choice. The prophecy was only “locked into” Harry because Voldmort chose it to be so.

    Flitquick is choosing to be in my lap…or is he predestined?

Speak Your Mind