I think you just justified library book theft.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Thats what I was thinking.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't get it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

To use a popular example, let's say you just finished reading the Harry Potter series, so you watch some J. K. Rowling interviews. As you're watching, you hear J. K. Rowling say that Luna Lovegood ends up marrying a man named Newt Scamander. This surprises you because, due to small things here and there in the books, you were absolutely certain Luna ended up in a relationship with Neville. You should be able to continue believing Neville and Luna end up together. J. K. Rowling has access to the same text as you (even though she wrote it), so you are under no obligation to acknowledge what she says happens outside of the text, though you can if you wish to. To put it more simply, you shouldn't just read a book how the author intended; you should be free to interpret it however you want.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Alright. I thought you meant physically belong.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So did the other commenters, apparently, but that's all right. I should've said I didn't mean it literally.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I understood! But I kind of disagree... I don't feel strongly enough to vote, but, to use your example, J.K. Rowling invented the world of Harry Potter, so I think she's the one to say what happens in it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

We can agree to disagree.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Done

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I agree. It's also really important to imagine others complexly. Also, a sidenote, the truth resists simplicity.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I like you.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Aww shucks :$

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Nerdfighters have a category? That's awesome. DFTBA.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yep. Anthony remembered to be awesome.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

When you write a book, you create a universe. You are God in that universe. the universe belongs to you. You can interpret anything however you want, but if the author closes interpretations through interviews, Pottermore-type things etc, then you keeping your interpretation is like saying you don't believe in atoms. Within a fictional universe, the author's fiction is non-fiction, and it's true whether or not you believe it. I wish Dumbledore wasn't gay, not because I have anything against gays, or because if there were two sides, we just lost the most powerful player on the field, but because I was planning to dress up as Dumbledore for Halloween with my future kids (I want to move to the US to escape the expensive housing in Singapore), and Rowling having stated that specifically mean I'll be pretending to be gay. You can have a gay Dumbledore if he was straight, but you can't have a straight Dumbledore if he was gay the same way you can add sugar to a cake to make it sweeter, but you can't remove the same sugar. Despite this, I'm not going to believe Dumbledore was straight because his creator stated specifically that he's not.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I understand your opinion, but I disagree. When I write stories, I don't feel like or pretend I'm the God of that universe. I feel like I'm just writing down a story that happened and that I had no control over.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Are we talking about a personal recount or a fantasy book? Because if you create it, you are God in it, whether you like it or not. What you want to do with your power, however, (share it, hoard it, turn your main character into the most powerful being in the universe) is entirely up to you. But if you write to remove inaccurate interpretations, and as pure fact, not subject to interpretation (" When she said Dumbledore was gay, I think she meant to say straight.") then it's canon and as much a part of your universe as anything in the books.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't think it matters if it's a memoir or fantasy. People have different ways of writing stories, but, even if you think up the universe of the story you're writing, you don't have to be the God of it. You can just be an observer in a universe you happened to imagine. I believe Rowling when she says Dumbledore is gay because I feel like certain things here and there in the books reaffirm it, but I don't just accept that he's gay because she says so. I accept it because I've arrived at the conclusion myself. But if someone was absolutely positive that Dumbledore was asexual or in a secret relationship with McGonagall, then they have no reason to suddenly think they're wrong. While writers have the task of putting their story on paper, readers also have a job, and that is to read well and interpret. I feel like if the writer were to clear up anything and everything that happens to the characters outside the text, it would be as if they stole the reader's job.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think you misunderstood what I mean by God. I mean you have unlimited power within the book. You can make anyone have any power, and you can make anything happen. There is nothing to limit your power (except maybe logic). I always thought of Dumbledore as asexual because he seems to be above such urges. I wouldn't mind pretending to be asexual because not liking girls is not the same as liking guys. I think we just have to agree to disagree on that last point. If I made a piece of art, such as a book, I would want people to see it the same way I do. There can be variations, of course, but if there is a gross misinterpretation, I would hold an interview or something to clarify. Sure, the readers can interpret how they want, but if I feel that diminishes the awesomeness of my writing, then of course I would clear things up.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I understand clearing things up if there's some gross misunderstanding, but that would be the reader doing a bad job interpreting. I suppose you were right about us just needing to agree to disagree, though, but that's all right. If we all just agreed on everything, the world would be a boring place.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

IKR

by Anonymous 11 years ago