What Does Harry Potter Mean Now? [75:48-77:44]

No matter how much we learn about Joanne, we can't know what was in her mind when she wrote Potter. Even if she outright tells us what she meant, we can still doubt her, like when she compares death eaters to trans activists. We can still argue that what she intended and what the text says are different things. It may seem foolish to disagree with an author about their own text. Famously, Fahrenheit 451 is widely interpreted and taught as a cautionary tale about censorship. Even though author Ray Bradbury has insisted he was actually criticising television and mass media. I was lecturing at Cal Fullerton once and they misinterpreted Fahrenheit 451. And after about half an hour of arguing with them telling them that they were wrong, I said, you, I've never used that word before and I left the classroom. However, while I marvel at the sheer brass neckery of telling an author he's wrong about his own book to his face, I'm sorry Ray, but if this many people say your book is about censorship to the point that sometimes printed on the actual cover, can you really claim that meaning isn't there? You're gonna look at me and you're gonna tell me that I'm wrong? Am I wrong? Maybe nobody's wrong. If an author says grido shot first and the readers are like, um, no handshot first actually, there's no way to prove which meaning is, quote unquote, correct. Both meanings exist now. And if readers disagree with an author's intent so strongly that they make new versions of the text supporting the reading they prefer, that's also gonna change the way we read the original. This happens with Potter too. Needless to say, shipping was rampant at the height of Potomania and a very popular pairing was Neville and Luna. But even though Joanne specifically debunked that ship, even though in a Q&A she said, um, Neville Mary's Hannah Abbott actually, when the final film came out.