#on one hand though I kind of wish the Nagini thing hadn't been spoiled though

[the-cardboard-constructionist]

I have a lot of mixed thoughts on JKR and the information that she has given out since the series officially ended. 

On one hand, it has never been a secret or a surprise that she had developed every single minor character in that series with a back story and relevance to a variety of things. This is not new information. She has been saying that the entire time, since as soon as this series became popular. Even before Pottermore, she had a website where she sometimes posted snippets about minor characters and gave them more depth, and some of it was things she contemplated putting in the books and ended up not having room for, and some of it was things that had no business being in the books because the backstory for that one kid who was killed when Voldemort collapsed a bridge and is really only mentioned in a small snippet of an article was not necessary there. Not everything she knew and planned for this universe had a place in the books. These are children’s books and not only that, but they are long as fuck children’s books, and honestly, children only have so much patience for books. There is only so long you can make them, and only so many things you can include. Which is why a lot of things, even things she originally intended to put in, aren’t in there. Which is honestly probably why Pottermore exists. Because she wanted to share the things that didn’t have a place in the book. The most memorable scene I remember from her original website about this was a scene where Theodore Nott goes to the Malfoy manor and hangs out with Draco while their parents are doing death eater things. It’s been literal years since I’ve read it so I don’t remember much else, but she has been releasing things like this all along. It just didn’t fit in the book. 

I think this also kind of applies to Nagini as well. I mean, let’s be realistic here. From the moment Nagini was introduced into the books, there has been a gazillion fucking theories about that snake. Some as tame as, Nagini is actually that same snake that Harry talked to in the first one, and others more complex, saying things like Nagini is an animagius, or other backstories. I can remember back when the most recent book was Order of the Phoenix reading fan theories about Nagini. The idea that she is not just an ordinary snake is not new. It is in absolutely no way new. In fact, it was taken as fact until it was revealed in the last one that she was a horocrux and then we all moved on and was like okay, that’s what special about her. But the fact that now we’re learning more... it’s... I don’t understand why it’s a bad thing. So now she’s a mythical being, and based on what I know about the mythical histories of the type of being she is, it makes sense that she’s Asian? Like... if they had given this same story, the same creature, who’s name is based on Indonesian mythology, and had a white person play her... I see just as many people being upset? Like... I honestly don’t imagine anyway that people would be happy with that at this point. It makes sense. And yeah, maybe she didn’t include enough representation of Asian people initially, why would it be wrong of her to try to fix that now? Why shouldn’t she do that? Like... sometimes people realize their mistakes and grow from it.

I do hear the arguments about Voldemort being a “white supremacist” and therefore it being a problem that a non-white character is working with him. And here’s what I have on that: Voldemort is not actually a white supremacist. Like, if he had existed in a non-magical setting, and his father had been a black man instead of a muggle, would he have been a white supremacist? Probably, yes. Does he have the same ideology that many white supremacists have? Absolutely. But he is a metaphor for a genocidal leader, and his particular problem is related to magic vs non-magic. Not actual race. It’s a metaphor for race, most of the time. So yes, it is a little bit off. But we also have to think about the fact that the metaphor is outside the story. The metaphor is how we related it to the actual world. There’s two way of looking at a story. Watsonian and Doylist. Watsonian is looking at it in story. Looking at an explanation for it in the story, and a reason why it works there. Doylist is looking outside the story and it’s context in the real world. (Which of course comes from Sherlock Holmes, the Doylest explanation always being that Sir ACD was not actually paying attention to what he was writing ever and named everyone James and then forgot about it). Looking at it from a Doylist perspective, yeah, it seems a bit off. But looking at it from a Watsonian perspective, it matters more about her blood status than her race. But also, it’s not like every single death eater fits the mold that Voldemort would have wanted. Hell, fucking Voldemort doesn’t. I see absolutely no reason why there wouldn’t have been wizards of color who were on the side of Voldemort. We know there were. We absolutely know there were. The Zabini family for one. In fact, I think so far our small amount of wizards of color were sprinkled pretty evenly across all the sides of the war. (The Zabini family is on Voldemort’s side, and on the good side we’ve got Dean Thomas and his family, we’ve got Kingsley Shatterbolt.)

Yes, she should absolutely have originally included more diversity. Yes, she should continue to include more diversity now as she seems intent on producing more content. But every time she does something like try to include different races, everyone jumps on her throat about it. Like... positive reinforcement, y’all. It works. And also, I’m relatively sure that she is not in charge of casting. She probably gets a say, she definitely approves of this one, but a reminder that she is an author, not a casting director. And as we all learned from the casting fiascos on “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before”, the author doesn’t actually end up with much say in the casting once the agreement has been made between the production company and the author. 

I can see how this Nagini thing can go wrong, but I can also see how it could go well. I’m not going to make up my mind until I’ve seen it. And again, it’s not like this information came out of nowhere. 

For everything more she added to those books, she would have had to take something out. So she made her choices on what was MOST relevant to the story. And maybe those choices aren’t the same as what some of us have made. Personally, I would have liked to see Dumbledore’s story explored in a way that showed us that he was gay. But she made a choice on what was deemed most relevant to his story, and that wasn’t it. It would have been nice if it was included, but it wasn’t. And I’m sure there are many reason for that, but honestly, when she says things like “Dumbledore is gay”, I have no doubt in my mind that that was something that was lurking in her brain the whole time. And certainly, we see no indications that would prove that statement wrong in the books. But realistically, the only time Harry’s professor’s love lives were relevant to him at all in any way, was when it was Snape and his mom. And that was less because it was Snape and more because it was his mom. But also because that led to the time Voldemort tried to kill him. Dumbledore’s love life from many years before Harry was even born just isn’t relevant to him. Like, I would have loved to see it. But I understand why it wasn’t there. Harry was hearing about everything with Grindlewald through what amounted to a rumor mill a lot of the time anyway, and Dumbledore is often a very private man. It made sense, storywise, for it not to be there. (And quite frankly, I’m not sure that Harry would have picked up on any subtle ways of saying it either.)

The Cursed Child was a disaster and all that, yes. And she approved it, but she wasn’t the one brainstorming the ideas for it, and honestly, none of that was exploring the world she created. It was a different potential. It probably wasn’t how she saw it all playing out. So I don’t really accept that as canon, in the same universe. Just like how the movies are in a slightly different but related universe than the books. So I don’t really feel the need to address that. 

Now... the wizarding school in America and the wizarding world here... it’s obvious that she doesn’t entirely understand American culture, but honestly, why would she? She isn’t American. And she knows of America and magic what is most obvious and taught. Salem Witch trials. The early types of New England magic. The types of magic we hear about in old Native American tales that aren’t quite right to what was actually believed, but changed by being passed down by those who didn’t know it 100%. She should have done more research. There are things I disagree with in her ideas about magic in the United States, but you can see where the ideas come from, and I think some of them are very good ideas about how it stated. It just... should have expanded since then. England is one of those countries that have been around for a very long time and a lot of things are very similar to how they’ve always been. America isn’t. It’s bigger and more diverse, and has so many different types of things. But is she really the person to incorporate all those things in? I think that honestly, no matter what she said about magic in America, we would have objected as a whole. Because there are things she doesn’t understand, and maybe she’s only there to set the frame work of it, and the people who understand better are the ones who can take it from there. Her origin story of the wizarding school sounds reasonable, it just needs to evolve. But we also need to remember that the wizarding community is different from what Americans are like not in that community. Just like it is in England. I don’t know how many of these ideas were ones that have been lurking in her head for years, because I’m sure some of them are. I’m sure some of the basics of how it works here have been in her head for a long time, because there’s a backstory for everything in her world. 

Now, how she is outside of her Harry Potter content, that I won’t speak to. I’ve heard some things I don’t like, but haven’t had a chance to fact check most of them and I’m not going to make a judgement until I do.

I just think a lot of the objections to her sharing her ideas on behind the story things is a bit intense and unnecessary. You don’t have to like it or believe it. But most of it isn’t coming from nowhere, and I’m sure a lot of it isn’t just being produced just for the sake of gaining interest back. It’s been there for years.