According to Iser when reading a furling narrative, the reader is led to follow the thoughts of the author. In light of the first two Harry Potter books this is quite true. I remember when I first read the books in the fifth grade, I was definitely duped into thinking Snape was the one after the Stone and Malfoy was the one opening the Chamber. I think the reason I followed this authorial trap was due to the fact that I wanted these antagonizing characters to get a bit of what they deserved. Conditioned to think that bad things happen to bad people, I expected Rowling to deliver some type of punishment to these vile characters. These turns of fate never came in the first two novels. I find that these expectations were beneficially denied. Not only did this acclimate me to how reality truly works, but it also provided a good and meaningful story.
The first two novels are very much mystery novels, akin to novels written by the likes of Agatha Christie and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Rowling follows Iser’s manipulative techniques. She makes you follow a road of expectation by making you want a certain route to come to fruition, hoping to see your expected end become reality (or un-reality in this case). And that’s all part of the experience: being duped and being surprised. Oddly, now that I realize this, I still find myself blindly following Rowling’s paths of clever trickery. Despite knowing what is to come, and realizing all the hidden truths as I read, I find myself engaging in the author’s train of thought. I subject myself to the deception to be duped and to be surprised at the end. It’s almost as if I’m willingly torturing myself over and over again. But I love it! I love the surprise, and most importantly, I love and respect Rowling’s meticulous work of manipulation for the reader’s behalf.
I realize that some would not find this repetition to be as engaging. But, I truly think that it’s the best option. If you sit down with the attitude of omniscience as you read through these first two novels, you’re not as engaged in the perceptions of the characters. You know that the Polyjuice endeavor is pointless and a waste of time, you know that Snape referring a Quidditch match is not a bad thing, and you never worry about Hagrid’s innocence and whether he truly is guilty. If you diverge from the author’s intended path for the reader, the experience of reading the story is greatly diminished and extraordinarily dulled. And it’s for this very reason that I let Rowling trick me all over again—I get to re-experience the whole ordeal as if it was the first time. That’s why I refuse to expect the unexpected.
No comments:
Post a Comment