or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › JK Rowling, keep your regrets to yourself!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JK Rowling, keep your regrets to yourself!

post #1 of 60
Thread Starter 

http://jezebel.com/breaking-j-k-rowling-regrets-pairing-up-ron-and-hermi-1514053646

 

Oh my, it's been a while since I contemplated this. 

 

What's your thought?  Right on!  or, I knew it! or, What the hell, Rowling??  How could you?  or, Journeymom, aren't you a bit too old for this?

 

Gotta remember the movies aren't the books, too. 

 

Neither Harry nor Ron were Hermione's equal.  I can't think of any original character that seems right for Hermione.    

 

jumpers.gif    <-----------  Trio

post #2 of 60

I cannot think of a canon character that is right for Hermione either! I love her character, J.K. Rowling did a fine job, and Hermione is hers, but someone I think Ron is good enough, not perfect, for her.

post #3 of 60

I feel like Ron and Hermione balance each other out very well. My husband and I are similar - one of us is anal and the other one more relaxed, we're both smart in different ways, I tend to be more of a by-the-book person and he's a bit of a rulebreaker. (He also teased me for rereading the HP series... again...)

 

I can't picture Harry with anyone other than Ginny. That was just perfect.

post #4 of 60
I like Ron/Hermoine. Personality-wise, they do balance each other out well. They make a good team since they have different strengths and weaknesses, but also have some chemistry. I don't think Harry was ever attracted to Hermoine. She's always been "just a friend" to him.

I'm always interested in hearing an author's thoughts, but in this case I agree with her written decision. Ron and Hermoine do well together.
Edited by kythe - 2/2/14 at 2:50pm
post #5 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caledvwlch View Post
 

I feel like Ron and Hermione balance each other out very well. My husband and I are similar - one of us is anal and the other one more relaxed, we're both smart in different ways, I tend to be more of a by-the-book person and he's a bit of a rulebreaker. (He also teased me for rereading the HP series... again...)

 

I can't picture Harry with anyone other than Ginny. That was just perfect.

Exactly.  I think it would be unfair to Hermione to partner her with someone else.  Ron helps to soften her edges, he helps her to relax a bit and have fun.  Also, because of being such good friends first, I think that Ron and Hermione have a deeper bond as a result.  I wouldn't have changed their pairing.  Oh, I also agree that Harry & Ginny were meant to be. 

 

Amy

post #6 of 60

Thank you thank you thank you for giving me a place to get this off my chest.  YES!  Ron and Hermione, Harry and Ginny.  Nononono Hermione and Harry.  Ron is sweet and I also think he was a good balance for her.  I loved watching their romance blossom, reading it in the books and watching on the screen.  Rowling should stop second guessing herself.  Her original intention was spot-on in my opinion.

 

Aaaaaaahhhh!  I feel so much better now!  And I don't think you are ever too old for this stuff.

post #7 of 60

I always hated Harry and Ginny together, and wasn't fond of Ron and Hermione.  Never felt it, and if she wanted that to be a part of the books, she should have developed the character of Ginny a little more, and made us believe in these relationships. She did try and develop Hermione and Ron in the last book, but it was too late for me, and I just figured that the relationships were not really that important to the story.  

post #8 of 60

When I read that I thought 'Wow, bit rough on Ginny'. Rowling didn't even mention her. 

 

I loved the Harry/Ginny pairing. It made psychological sense. If Harry was going to end up with somebody other than Hermione, it would kinda have to be someone 'out of the blue', as there weren't that many well-developed female characters Harry's age. (Or, well, any aside from Hermione...) But because Ginny and Harry had been around each other a lot and spent a lot of time together, even if it was 'offscreen', it made sense for them to develop a liking and attraction. Even if you didn't actually see it happening organically, you could imagine it happening organically, which would have been harder if he'd randomly started going out with, say, Hannah Abbot or one of the Patel girls. You know? Plus, I was glad he ended up being truly part of the Weasley family. That was nice. :)

 

As for Ron and Hermione - I like the pairing OK, and I'm glad Harry and Hermione didn't end up together, but I can kind of see Rowling's point. What does Ron have going for him, exactly? He's not smart - and I don't just mean book smart, he doesn't show much intelligence of any kind. He's not particularly nice - he grumps and sulks through half the books, with a chip on his shoulder a foot long about being a) poor, b)the sixth child, c) not Harry. People say he's brave, which... I guess?... but not compared to Hermione and Harry. He's not particularly funny. He's not described as being good-looking. He's not talented at sports. He's not particularly talented at anything - wizard chess, maybe? He doesn't strike you as the type who's going to be rich and successful. He doesn't stand out as a devoted/caring/protective brother or son. 

 

I mean, I like the character well enough. But he's not, per se, a catch. Whereas Hermione is incredibly smart and gifted, is described as good-looking in the later books, is very brave, resourceful, uncomplaining in difficult circumstances, and generally awesome. I can see why she likes him - driven people often end up with laid-back people - but that's a different question to 'is he good enough for her?' Technically, I don't think he is. Doesn't mean they wouldn't be happy; just means he got the better end of the deal.

post #9 of 60

I liked that Harry ended up a member of the Weasley family, by marriage. He didn't have a family, and then he did. (Yes - I know they considered him to be part of the family, anyway, but I liked that his marriage to Ginny formalized it.)

 

I don't see any real reason for it to have been Harry and Hermione. That's just more "male lead gets the girl" stuff, and there's no rational reason for it. Why shouldn't Harry and Hermione be friends? There's no real reason for Ron and Hermione to be together, either, but I do like that she ended up with a member of a long-established wizarding family, with a whole childhood/life rooted in withcraft and wizardry. That part of it worked for me, because it really suited her enthusiasm for the magic world. (I know Harry came from a long line of witches and wizards, too, but he grew up ignorant about it, unlike Ron).
 

I actually find this "I'm talking about the things I should have done differently in a hugely popular series that I finished writing several years ago" stuff in interviews really tedious. I didn't like the "Dumbledore is gay" thing, either...not because I have an issue with Dumbledore being a gay character. I just don't see the point in spelling it out in interviews if she wasn't going to spell it out in the book.

 

I wish she'd just let this stuff drop.

post #10 of 60

But Ron was athletic (HBP) and brave and loyal (many books, especially DH), he was just burdened with self-doubt.  It just took 7 years, 7 books and 8 movies for him to realize that.  I think it would have been too obvious for Harry and Hermione to hook up, and the books did a better job of establishing Harry and Ginny's romance IMO than the movies.  

 

Did she really say Dumbledore was gay?  Ha!  Must we hear about everyone's sexual orientation?  And McGonagall, or Professor Sprout? Or Flitwick?  

post #11 of 60

He wasn't *that* loyal. He did leave Harry and Hermione high and dry in HBP, which was a childish and rotten thing to do. And he was disloyal to Hermione with Lavender - not cheating per se, as they weren't actually going out, but kinda shabby behavior nonetheless. I mean, he was on the right side - he wasn't a Death Eater - and he fought the bad guys, but that kinda seems like a minimal baseline for decent humanity under the circumstances, not evidence of a startlingly marriageable character. Plus, let's not forget he was mean to House-Elves. :p I don't get the impression he would have been a shining beacon of anti-Voldemortness if he hadn't happened to be friends with Harry and Hermione; whereas the other two seemed independently and deeply committed to the cause (Hermione, arguably, for nobler and more disinterested reasons than Harry, although I suppose her blood status gave her a vested interest in the politics as well.)

 

He did end up being good at Quidditch, didn't he? I forgot about that. Mostly remembered him fumbling around and being inept. :p Still, that's not a lot to go on in terms of marriageability. She may as well have married Krum. :p

 

Wow, I sound really anti-Ron, don't I? I'm not, really. He was fine; fun to read about. I could understand some of his insecurities. I just hope he appreciated what a lucky man he was to end up with Hermione!

 

I must admit I greeted both revelations - the Dumbledore thing and the Harry/Hermione thing - with a certain amount of cynicism. It seems to me a leetle like she's trying to stay relevant and in the public eye. Next up: everyone in Hufflepuff had Down Syndrome, but she didn't mention it in the books because she never saw their differences as important! Aunt Petunia's entire character was shaped by her frustrated desire to be a trapeze artist! McGonagall was 1/16th Cherokee!

post #12 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
 

I must admit I greeted both revelations - the Dumbledore thing and the Harry/Hermione thing - with a certain amount of cynicism. It seems to me a leetle like she's trying to stay relevant and in the public eye. Next up: everyone in Hufflepuff had Down Syndrome, but she didn't mention it in the books because she never saw their differences as important! Aunt Petunia's entire character was shaped by her frustrated desire to be a trapeze artist! McGonagall was 1/16th Cherokee!

Me too--I also really don't like being able to find out "more" than was written in the books.  The characters are CHARACTERS, not people.  You can't interview them later to find out more stuff.  We learn the more relevant information in the books.  Who cares if Dumbledore was gay?  It seems to me that JKR behaves as if she is speaking of a real world & real people half the time.  I also think she does this to make sure that certain things from the books make sense.  She gives "more" background information, etc.  For me though, a book is the BOOK.  It was edited for a reason.  If the material didn't make it in there, then I don't need to find out about it later (unless it is a sequel/prequel).  

 

Amy

post #13 of 60

Oh - also wanted to mention that Harry and Ginny wasn't from out of nowhere, imo. From the very first book, I suspected Rowling was going to pair them up, eventually.

post #14 of 60
Thread Starter 

I'm liking the contrary statements/posts, here.

 

It's her story to write. There aren't enough words to describe all the things I admire about the story and her writing. 

 

Perhaps readers can't apply a 'should have' to someone else's story.  But given Rowling's own logic and the rules she set up in her universe, some conclusions seem logical to me, and she did not follow her own logic.  As I interpret it, anyway.  :D

 

Hermione should not have married Harry instead of Ron.  I like what someone here said, that Hermione should have met someone outside of  Hogwarts, someone her intellectual and academic equal. That was the natural conclusion given the Hermione that Rowling herself created, seems to me.

 

Or, she should have developed Ron more. 

 

 

Here, this is great:  http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/02/03/j-k-rowling-ron-hermione-harry-potter/

 

And her last line is just brilliant. Sums up my take, as well. 

post #15 of 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokering View Post
 

When I read that I thought 'Wow, bit rough on Ginny'. Rowling didn't even mention her. 

 

I loved the Harry/Ginny pairing. It made psychological sense. If Harry was going to end up with somebody other than Hermione, it would kinda have to be someone 'out of the blue', as there weren't that many well-developed female characters Harry's age. 

That's a good point.

post #16 of 60

That link had another opinion piece about Ginny:

 

http://popwatch.ew.com/2013/12/30/ginny-weasley-harry-potter-movie-book/

 

It's good to know I'm not the only one who thinks the films did her a disservice.  If hadn't read the books I might have wondered about the connection.  

post #17 of 60
Thread Starter 

Nice essay supporting Ginny!  Good summary.  I'd forgotten a lot.

post #18 of 60

I'm a housekeeper, so I have plenty of time at work to contemplate Universal Truths, solutions to my everyday dilemmas, and profoundly important issues-- like this one here!

 

I've realized that in one way, Rowling is right in  second guessing herself, but it's not the reason she thinks it is.  Harry and Ginny do work well together (in the books) the problem is the way she developed Ron's character and why she developed it that way.  I think she was attempting to create an odd couple pairing, the against-the-odds evolution of love (Mulder and Scully) and friendship (Felix and Oscar, speaking of Odd Couples).  Wanting to draw this out over 7 books, I think she wound up painting an overly (and arguably) unflattering character in Ron.  She seemed to focus so much on the bickering Odd Couple that she didn't give them enough magnetism to convince everybody (even herself) that this was a match made in heaven, if only the characters would realize it.

 

Well, she didn't pull off a coup with that strategy.  Rick Riordan barely pulled it off in his Percy Jackson series, IMO, but he did a far better job of it than she.  Perhaps because Percy is the main character, he had plenty of time to focus on his good qualities (and the fact that evil Luke and the nerdy literary Grover the Satyr--the "Ron counterpart" in the series--were totally unlikely options.)  While I felt the final decision made by Annabeth (Hermione's counterpart) was a little stretched, she did have a lot to build a relationship with Percy.  (And, on that tangent, we get to enjoy a solid and passionate relationship in the Heroes of Olympus series, now the couple is together.)

 

So that's what I think JKR's mistake is.  Not the wrong pairing, but an overly ambitious attempt to create tension between Hermione and Ron until the last second.  AND for not giving Hermione her fair share of stubbornness beyond the House Elf issue she (so obnoxiously) clings to (oh thank heavens that whole storyline got ditched for the movies--shall I go on a tirade on how I felt that it was one reason that OOTP was so interminably frustrating to read?  Some of the best chapters in the series continually interrupted by oh-jeez-just-get-back-to-the-frickin-plot chapters?  No--I'll stop there.  I will say I think that's why I liked that movie so much!)

 

Oooh, thanks again for letting me geek out about this.

post #19 of 60
Thread Starter 

Sweetsilver, that was thoroughly enjoyable.

 

I'm restraining myself, I simply don't have time to include the wandering river of thoughts your post released. :lol

 

But I've got to say I was so disappointed with the movie OOTP.  I came out of the theater literally depressed.  My expectations were much too high.

post #20 of 60

And mine were completely in the pits because I was so frustrated with the book.  It helps with movies to be prepared for the worst  :)  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Talk Amongst Ourselves
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › JK Rowling, keep your regrets to yourself!