A rant about a popular rant....

[conuly]

Many people are claiming that it is impossible for the characters in HPB to be "ooc" because, after all, JKR wrote the book, and they're her characters, so they're always in character!

I'm not going to argue over whether or not they are in character. I will say, however, that it is possible for them to be out of character, or, at least, to have inconsistent characterization, which is just about the same thing.

If JKR had written five books that involved a sweet kid who never would hurt a fly, and then, in the sixth book, had him go on a murderous rampage for no reason whatsoever - that would be out of character. If Harry had been writing Hermione love letters for the past five books, and dreaming about her, then to have him suddenly declare his undying love for McGonagal in this book would be out of character. If Voldemort suddenly appeared at Hogwarts with some chocolate and said he just wanted to make up - that would be out of character, and it doesn't matter who writes it.

None of that happened in this book, granted, but my point still stands. It is entirely possible for JKR to have written this book with all the main characters out of character. Please don't use this post to argue that they are or aren't, because I'm not getting into that. Just... be logical, thanks.

Oh, and incidentally? If you're reading these books because of the Harry/Draco or Ron/Squid love, or whatever else you've got going - I'll move a complaint that you *may* be reading them for the wrong reason. Even in book 6, the relationships aren't the focus of these stories.

Comments

[morganne13.livejournal.com]

In my opinion, when talking about books, it makes more sense to say that its inconsistent characterization than to say that the character is ooc. To me, saying they're ooc implies that they are intentionally or accidentally being something other than themselves, more like an actor or a player in a role playing game doing something they'd do rather than the character they're trying to portray. Inconsistent characterization places the responsibility? i guess for the weirdness on the author rather than the character, which is where it should be.

[atalantapendrag.livejournal.com]

That's a matter of semantics. I will grant the distinction, but it means more or less the same thing; if it had been in a fanfic, it would have been considered OOC, and having the "Holy One"'s name on the spine doesn't make it any better.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

Humans have this thing where, for no reason, when ever they see males and females (or occasionally males and other males, males and squids, etc.) they have the irrational need to attempt to pair them off. Out of the blue, they have the urge to say "this person should be with this person, and this person should be with this person, and that's the way it should be".

This isn't just out of a need to create romance - Look at Fred and George! I haven't seen any fan fiction where someone tries to pair them off with other people. Why? They're already a pair. They're two units merged in such a way that they're inseparable. I'd be willing to wager that if they split ways and decided to have completely different interests, the net would suddenly be flooded with fan fiction about one or the other of them getting together with some girl.

...

Humans are weird.

[thette.livejournal.com]

I've read quite a cute fanfic where the two of them get together with Dawn (from Buffy).

[ladydiana.livejournal.com]

Well, some people were acting out of character, to be sure. That could be part of the plot. Some people may have also had inconsistent characterization, which is another matter.

Acting out of character, for example, like Voldemort, could be interesting.

[snale.livejournal.com]

I agree with all your points, except the very last. In book 6, the relationships absolutely take center stage... to the detriment of the story. It almost feels like JKR is responding directly to the fans: "Hermione/Harry? NO! Ron/Hermione! Harry/Ginny! Lupin/Sirius? NO! Lupin/Tonks!" And while she left gaping plot holes (when exactly did everyone learn that Malfoy had a hand of glory?) she goes on for pages about teenage toungue kissing.
The coupling (to my mind) was relentless. I mean, please. Filch/Pince? What's that all about? Meh. Well, to each her own, I suppose.

[appadil.livejournal.com]

I'm VAGUELY remembering the Malfoys picking up a Hand of Glory in the first book (at Knockturn Alley, I believe...) I'm not at all certain, though, and my copy is at my dad's house so I can't exactly go check.

[snale.livejournal.com]

The Hand of Glory is mentioned in that chapter (CoS, Ch4), but at that time Lucius refuses to buy it for his son, saying that he hopes Draco will amount to more than a theif or plunderer.
It's possible to make a guess and say that after Draco becomes a DE and goes to Borgin & Burke's, he demands to have the Hand of Glory in order to complete his mission for the Dark Lord.
However, this still doesn't explain how Harry & co. didn't guess, but rather seemed to know that Draco had it and was using it to sneak around the castle. It seemed like there ought to have been just a smidge of explanation there.

[sicpuppy.livejournal.com]

Surely the only person who will ever know if a character is 'out of character' is the person who invented said character? They're the only one who truely knows what the character has been through in his life, what he is prone to acting like, what he is capable of acting like in certain situations etc.
Im a writer, and I don't like to think that my characters would suddenly be considered 'out of character' or 'wrong' if they did something surprising. Maybe it's just a side of the character you haven't seen before, or a side which was kept repressed, or even a side which was there but not written about until now?

[morganne13.livejournal.com]

Um...fanfic's are a little dicier on the semantics. It doesn't have anything to do with the "Holy One" as much as it being a matter of creation. The author of a work with characters in which those characters are new, the semantics of it are that if the author slips up in their creating, its inconsistent characterization. With the fanfics, their being a written work I would still tend to go with the phrase "inconsistent characterization," but because the fanfic author is not the original creator of the character or necessarily an official? user of the character might be a way to say it, the arguement could be made to say that something they write is OOC.

As far as fanfics and their being in that grey area, its up to you which you consider to be the more fitting term. So goes the english language. :-)

[cindel.livejournal.com]

J.F.C Whatever happened to enjoying a book? The only thing I will ever get anal about is history and whether or not it's historical accurate, not a goddamn book.

[conuly]

Well, to be fair, that is how a lot of people enjoy books. Different strokes, right?

As for "whatever happened to enjoying books", have you noticed the trend in any and all YA books to have "teachers guides" at the back? Always with the same stupid questions, too. Talk about taking the fun out of life....

[conuly]

In this case, I'll say that the people in question weren't acting out of character - with the possible exception of Ginny, and even she can be chalked up to hormones, growth, and being noticed.

But here's the thing. If you write something with inconsistent characters (is that a better phrase? Because it means about the same thing), and everybody calls you on it, it's wise to take that advice. That's why authors all have editors.

[conuly]

Oh, no, I agree that they were too much a focus - my point was that if you're reading these books for the relationships, you'd better get the hell out of it before she fills the next one with even MORE of that nonsense.

[snale.livejournal.com]

Ohhhhh! Okay, we're in complete agreement, then. :)

[feathered.livejournal.com]

Actually, there's so much fred/george slash that there's a whole term for it: twincest.

Not that I READ this shit. It just appears on my friends/friends page.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure that I recall hearing the term "twincest" since long before Happr Potter.

Regardless, that only further suppords my argument.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

...I'm beginning to think more and more that perhaps the series would have been better off had she taken three years on this on like she did on order of the phoenix.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

I don't think that the characters were really all that inconsistent... I just think that they were growing older. If I look back on how much my personality and outlook on life had changed between when I was eleven and fifteen - not to mention those of all my close friends - I begin to find it stupid to assume that anyone wouldn't change.

Please point out instances where I was completely wrong, but most of the changes throughout the books, (particularly the last two) seemed like natural extensions of the characters into the fourth dimension.

Then again, I'm typically slow to see fault and quick to forgive...

[snale.livejournal.com]

You'll get no argument from me. :)

[snale.livejournal.com]

Then again, I'm typically slow to see fault and quick to forgive...
Those are wonderful qualities to have. Hang onto them with both hands.

Here's my take on the character inconsistencies:
I certainly don't feel that they shouldn't be maturing (which they are), but to me it seemed their basic characteristics in this book were strangely off. Harry hardly thought of Sirius more than once, Hermione didn't seem to be looking things up half as much as usual, none of the kids seemed to really care about Hagrid beyond the obligation they felt to him... When you take into account that only a few weeks had passed between OotP and HBP, it's rather shocking that their behaviors and feelings should have shifted so much and with little or no warning.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have Draco Malfoy. We've had hints of what we'd find, but until this book we never saw how much he really loves his mother, and how scared he can be under that viscious veneer. I thought we got to see changes in his character, but done in a really gradual and insightful way.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

I just interpreted the lack of Harry thinking of Sirius and Hermione perusing the library as Rowling wanting to keep the book more focused. I'm sure that they occurred frequently during the half a year plus worth of days that she didn't specifically touch on for the duration of the story. Same with Snape's defense against the dark arts lessons.

I did see the lack of Hagrid as a little disturbing. Perhaps Warner Brothers was putting some pressure on her? I seem to recall a rumor that Robbie Coltrane's contract only lasts through movie five.

[snale.livejournal.com]

I just interpreted the lack of Harry thinking of Sirius and Hermione perusing the library as Rowling wanting to keep the book more focused

Which brings us back to the gazillion pages she spent telling us about Ron frenching Lavender and Hermione being jealous over it. If the book was to be really focused, she could have gotten that across and moved on...
Anyway.
All the nitpicking in the world isn't going to change the book as it stands, so... Ho hum.

[sporks5000.livejournal.com]

Bu I think that those were worth putting in the story because the fan community has proved, resoundingly, that this was what they wanted.

...Not that it's at all what I wanted, but still...

[conuly]

Yes, but a red pen will work marvels....