On that Time magazine interview with JKR (may contain HBP spoilers)

[persephone_kore]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1083935,00.html

I'm really puzzled by a few things here. I'm not the first to comment on what she says about Narnia, nor on the reporter's rather bizarre decision to slam C. S. Lewis further, nor for that matter on the rather perplexing idea that magic makes everything all better in most fantasy novels.

But look at this from page 1:

The most popular living fantasy writer in the world doesn't even especially like fantasy novels. It wasn't until after Sorcerer's Stone was published that it even occurred to her that she had written one. "That's the honest truth," she says. "You know, the unicorns were in there. There was the castle, God knows. But I really had not thought that that's what I was doing. And I think maybe the reason that it didn't occur to me is that I'm not a huge fan of fantasy."

And this from page 2:

Granted, Rowling's books begin like invitations to garden-variety escapism: Ooh, Harry isn't really a poor orphan; he's actually a wealthy wizard who rides a secret train to a castle, and so on. But as they go on, you realize that while the fun stuff is pure cotton candy, the problems are very real--embarrassment, prejudice, depression, anger, poverty, death. "I was trying to subvert the genre," Rowling explains bluntly. "Harry goes off into this magical world, and is it any better than the world he's left? Only because he meets nicer people. Magic does not make his world better significantly. The relationships make his world better. Magic in many ways complicates his life."

Er? Since these things are pretty clear right from the first book (and she's commented on this elsewhere, that the first book starts with a double murder and yet people act as if it isn't dark), I'm a little unsure how these statements fit together. Also on how much of a subversion this is. There are stories where magic ends up as the solution to problems, but right back to fairy tales there are also stories where it's more of a complication.

Also, while the article says she never finished all of the Chronicles of Narnia (and rather implies that she didn't like them at all), there are previous interviews where she mentioned enjoying things about them. She even told us her favorite character. (Nope, not the lion.)

Now, this is fair enough; there are plenty of stories I enjoy despite points of disagreement or outright irritation. There are series I've started and never gotten around to finishing, or where I like some books considerably more than others. There are authors with multiple books in separate storylines where I like some and find others deadly dull. For that matter, there's still the chance Rowling herself will turn out not to be writing some of the themes I thought she'd set up, things I thought I perceived that drew me deeper into the books than... oh, With a Single Spell by wossname. (Yes, fine, I sound like an H/Hr shipper. Whatever.) I'm more annoyed with the article author; JKR expressed distaste for one of Lewis's story developments, but I don't think she's the one who suggested he'd be a Death Eater!

But having seen RJA note that JKR had previously referred to liking Narnia, I went back to find some more information on this....

She said her favorite character was Eustace! Because he was "a very unlikeable character who turns good." And also funny.

Isn't that interesting.

Comments

[sixth-light.livejournal.com]

The Narnia-bashing was ridiculous. The Narnia series are the first books I remember reading, and my copies are almost falling to bits from re-reads; Christian allegory or not, and when you're five you don't notice anyway, they are wonderful children's books. Plus they're giving NZ a chance to add to the list of fantasy places we can stand in for. :P

Interesting comment about Eustace. He is one of the better characters in the series, because he acts like so many others would act if asked to accept that they've fallen through a painting into a different world.

[persephone-kore.livejournal.com]

Heh. I really hope the movie's good, especially since it comes out right around my birthday. ;) I mean, I would anyway, but bonus!

Having looked at another recent interview where she mentions Narnia, JKR said that she read them but never finished, never read the last one. And that could actually make sense, that she liked several of them (especially Voyage of the Dawn Treader) but disagreed with Lewis on Point X, and didn't get around to finishing The Last Battle.

(Actually, I think I remember taking a couple of tries to get into that one myself -- it seemed sadder than all the rest, and with the main evil being deceit I think it felt... dirtier. And, erm, I was very young. As in, this was probably before I read Anne of Green Gables and decided that I wasn't interested in the sequels, at least not yet, because I felt that Anne was getting too grown up!)

[sixth-light.livejournal.com]

The Last Battle was always my least favourite, not because of the religion but because of all the nasty things that went on - and what happened to Susan. I think it's her fate more than anything else that millions of females hold against C S Lewis, because the whole "if you like lipstick you don't get to go to heaven" thing? SO contrived. She was one of the best characters, and then it's all like "Sorry, she isn't there because she wore stockings!!!!"

Although part of me also sympathises with not liking the type of girls who "waste all their school time wanting to be [teenagers], and spend the rest of their lives trying to stay that age", but Susan WASN'T that type of girl. She was cool and brave and kick-ass with her bow and arrows. She was a Queen of Narnia, for heaven's sake. And Lewis just dumped her.

[alphabet26.livejournal.com]

I don't know; Susan did have trouble "keeping the faith," to continue the metaphor. Remember in Prince Caspian? No one but Lucy could see Aslan at first, but Susan had the hardest time with it. Totally adored Edmund there. "Let's follow Lucy--I'm sure she's right." And I thought that in Voyage Susan got to go to America, because she was the beauty and needed opportunities. I thought I remembered that she was becoming a bit stuck-up. I haven't read the Chronicles in a long time, though.