~~ it's a meme's paradise....

This is kind of in slight reference to a comment in sistermagpie's post about the supposed book 6 title and secondarily, the idea that criticizing the books/JKR would imply that that particular fan is saying they're somehow 'superior' & thus not a fan.

I think this seems relevant to me 'cause I do criticize things (more fanfics than canon, since I'm more in constant contact with fanfics and they seem more relevant) all the time, in terms as large and sweeping as some of the critiques of JKR's canon treatment of Slytherins, for example, and yet it's interesting 'cause I certainly remain a 'fan' of fanfic. There are complexities there, in terms of what makes one a fan & what enjoying the reading experience means for different people. It may seem contradictory that I don't feel like I'm a fan of JKR's writing at all, yet I enjoy some aspects of the HP books very much. I feel like I can enjoy some aspects of a work just as I can criticize and even feel upset with some others, at the same time.

Another interesting aspect is this idea of superiority. Do I imply my own superiority by criticizing others' fiction?

It's fascinating partly because what I'm criticizing is the work of other fans-- therefore we're supposed to be equal, right; and of course we are in the way that everyone's ideas/works are equally valid for scrutiny. Yet we, as a group of fan writers, are not very comfortable, overall, critiquing each other's methods. It gets too personal, right? Criticizing fanfic is a risky venture. Whereas criticizing JKR is impersonal, because-- well-- she's significantly separate from us fans. However, some authors would say having a group of people call themselves fans implies they are theirs: that somehow, the fans' behavior or beliefs are the author's province.

I think some fans feel free to talk back because she's simply not a part of a community: of -our- community. The fan's Author is the shadowy presence behind the books-- a construct-- an appropriation; they're almost a 'super-ego' aspect of oneself as Reader. They're quite different from an actual -person-, I think, with actual feelings & opinions. Thus there are a lot more people who talk about canon than fanon (though I myself talk about fanon, mostly). Our community has rules, of a sort, and JKR seems to think she heads it; that's more of a claim that may or may not have supporters rather than an established 'rule'.

JKR clearly believes she's superior to her readers. I myself think there can be no superiority attached to anyone's lit-crit ideas in terms of either canon or fanon-- simply because there's no such thing, really, as 'objective'. The ideas just are, and they can exist or die on their own merits. It's all about the memetics, man. The memes! The books! They are alive! Woo! We are the carriers-- JKR... JKR is the meta-carrier, but still a carrier.

I'm not so post-modern as to say 'The Author' is a fallacy-- I'd just say... The Author is an incomplete meme without The Reader there to interpret them. It is true that The Author can be their own Reader, but the receptivity is muddled (by foreknowledge and conscious intent which may or may not have been successfully translated)-- which is why it's so helpful to read one's works a long time later, when one -forgets- a lot of what one's written. The Creator alone, in other words, is not 'god'; any reality-- fictional or not-- is going to be co-created by anyone who perceives it.

( ...Why yes, I am a blasphemer; what else is new? )

Basically? Yeay for subjectivity. :> And for the idea that instead of coming at the expense of The Real Truth, it can co-create it. Man. I love contradictions :D They make my brain tickle. Non-linear thinkers, scatter!!1