Discussions - Part One

[potterfan226]

*CRIES* Oh my gosh, I had this long post and my computer froze. NOO. Okay well here's the shortened version. Enjoy.


As much as I love the movies, I have to agree that the most recent ones are far from what I expected them to be when I read the book. Whilst I think most characters are portrayed wonderfully, others, I have to wonder if the script writers have even read the books.

I start my rant with Hermione. I mean come one, people, yes Emma Watson is gorgeous and I'd love to be her for like a day, but to me, she isn't the Hermione I first read about. Although over the years, I will admit that my image of Hermione in my mind is slowly morphing into how Hermione was portrayed in POA. I know many have ranted on about Hermione in this thread, but it's something we all have in common. I think her booksmarts is portrayed fairly good but it's her attitude in general. Like I know Harry Potter is more moderanized (sp?) than is should be and Emma was so happy when she finally got Hermione into jeans, but that's just not Hermione. Hermione doesn't wear jeans from what I know. And I've noticed ever since Prisoner of Azkaban came out, I've seen a lot of fanfics where Hermione is wearing 'a little mascara and blush.' I'm sorry, I just dont see Hermione wearing any makeup.

And then there's Ron. I find it kind of ironic how the script writers gave almost all of his lines to Hermione and giving him pathetic lines which he wouldn't even say. Out of all the trio, however, I think Ron is portrayed the best. Even though he's like the underdog out of them all. Hermione ... see above, and Harry ... mm, I just dont see Harry like that when I read the books. I honestly dont know what it is, but something about Harry in the movies irkes me.

If I had to pick one character out of all of the movies who portrayed their character the best, I would say Richard Harris as Dumbledore 100%. He had the gentle side, the glint in the eye, in the first two films, and while Michael Gambon is decent, he's just too hyper to be a Dumbledore. Like in Prisoner of Azkaban, he was running up the stairs quite fast. I think Michael Gambon will make a good Dumbledore, somewhat, in Half-Blood Prince. You know, for the whole Horcrux hunt thing. But otherwise, Richard Harris is a true Dumbledore.

Now to fanfiction. I probably 2nd x 100 to say that most authors have the mistake of portraying their characters as they see in the movie. Draco is suddenly this hot shot, and yes I'll admit he is rather, rather good looking, but the Draco I envision in my mind is pale and looks like that really white guy in the Da Vince Code. Dont ask. Kinda, sorta, anyway.

And that's the shortened version. I can't remember what else I had.

[GringottsVault711]

Insecurity
mooncalf
Starmaiden
Siriuslymental
sirius_rocks
Gmariam
femmefatale
TheMusicOrTheMisery
Undivideable410
Madame Marauder
kumyadabookworm
cherryandphoenixfeather
Konrad
Blackhairedweasley
potterfan226

10 points each! That's 40 to Ravenclaw, 10 to Hufflepuff, 40 to Gryffindor and 60 to Slytherin.

[GringottsVault711]

cmwinters
StellaSirius
Sour.Apple
Starmaiden
forgotten_poems
lunar
I Love Severus Snape
Lily Luna Lupin
TheLoyalOne
EyeEetStrudel
Schmerg_the_impaler
bittersweet_lullaby
Scarlet

10 points each! 50 to Slytherin, 30 to Ravenclaw, 20 to Hufflepuff and 30 to Gryffindor.

[GringottsVault711]

In fan-fiction, because of a lack of canon information about certain minor characters, liberties are often taken and entirely new entities are created. Entities that soon spread across fan-fiction as a generalised but acceptable version of said character. Sometimes it's as simple as physical attributes, but sometimes it pertains to the entire character's personality.

For example, Neville Longbottom and Katie Bell's appearances aren't described in canon, yet, there seems to be an general agreement in fan-fiction that Neville has brown hair and brown eyes, and that Katie has blonde hair and blue eyes. It was also widely believed that Blaise Zabini was a dark-haired Slytherin of Italian descent [and in many cases, people took liberty with the lack of mentioned gender and wrote female!Blaise], until Half-Blood Prince came out and set the record straight

There is also the widely accepted version of Lily Evans in fan-fiction despite the fact that her canon appearance is a brief one, from which many interpretations can be made. And other characters - Cho Chang, Lavendar Brown, Parvati Patil - who are taken, and subsequently written, at face-value by many authors to the point they become cliched characterisations.

Which characters do you find unfairly or improperly characterised by fandom as a whole? Do you abide by the fandoms characterisation of these minor character, or do you work straight from the source?

Have you ever had someone criticise your characterisation of a minor canon character because they compared your version with a more common fandom version? What minor characters do you write, and how do you make them your own? Or, alternately, which authors write 'versions' of minor characters that you find original yet accurate, based on canon?

*note, you don't have to answer every question. They're just starter questions to give you an idea of what the discussion pertains to.

[sirius_rocks]

Which characters do you find unfairly or improperly characterised by fandom as a whole? Definately Sirius Black, sometimes Hermione and Draco Malfoy. But I have also read that Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown as annoying s!^#s. Sirius is most commonly portrayed as the sex-god, the ladies-man and all-around womanizer. Although at times this can be rather funny, I don't think he would treat anyone like that. Hermione and Draco, in their romance fics, Draco is also a sex-god and Hermione, yeah, get this, is STUPID. Yeah, believe it.

which authors write 'versions' of minor characters that you find original yet accurate, based on canon? I once read an excellent Pansy Parkinson fic, Pure & Proud, and it's brilliant. You see her in a whole new light, if you agree on the Pansy/Draco status.

[atkarid]

I love minor characters, both writing and reading, and I have to agree that many are always characterized somewhat along the same lines. I think I've even gone along those lines. But I guess the reason why everybody portrays them as "those" characters is because that's the first reaction you get when you really meet them.

Take Lavender, for instince. We barely see her for five books, other than she loves Divination (sp?), she giggles, and her bunny died. Then, we start actually seeing some of her character (that happens to be a bit lovesick) and that's what we base her whole character on. We don't see the normal Lavender a lot, just the lovesick one a whole bunch of times, and we base it off that.

Which characters do you find unfairly or improperly characterised by fandom as a whole?
Lavender, Parvati, Cho, and like sirius_rocks said, young Sirius. I confess that I did purposely make Lavender and Parvati a bit gossip queenish (but that was for a humor fic! ) but sometimes, it's too much. Close the Door by the nutty imp is a good Lavender fic. Shows a less fluffy side, but still has good characterization. As for Sirius, well, he's not nicely interpretted. I think some readers missed the part where he did not notice (or care for) the girl staring at him.

What minor characters do you write, and how do you make them your own?
Ahh.. I write any minor character that I can think of a plot bunny for. So far, I've only done a couple, and have a couple coming. And I don't think I make them my own. I just usually try to find a more serious or sad side of them, and just write it out. Hopefully, I found serious, and not sad.

[Cheshlin]

Which characters do you find unfairly or improperly characterised by fandom as a whole? Do you abide by the fandoms characterisation of these minor character, or do you work straight from the source?

I try to just go straight from the source, but I've read a lot of fanfictions, so I can't say that is always true.

What minor characters do you write, and how do you make them your own?

I have not written too many of the minor characters, but I have written Tonks and Neville (though the Neville fic isn't on this site). I try to put myself in their shoes, and write from what I know of them. I'm not sure if I've done a good job with them or not.

I find the girl crazy and womanizing Sirius very annoying. If he had been like that back then, he would have still been like that. He wasn't given the chance to "grow up". He was pretty much the same age after his time in Azkaban as he was when he went in...just a lot sadder and worn. You can see some of that in his restlessness and attitude with Harry.

[miss padfoot]

Minor characters are fun to write. Mainly because, we don't know a lot of them, but just snippets to get us started. It's wonderful to read/write these characters and the author's interpretation of them and how it differs/similar to canon.

Lily is one of the characters who is often characterised as a goody-two shoes/total nerd. She was pretty clever and smart in her studies, but portraying her as an older version of Hermione annoys me. Jo herself said that Lily was more like Ginny than Hermione. And Slughorn describes her as 'cheeky'. It becomes really annoying when Lily is written like this.

When I write characters I haven't written before, I try not to go by what the general consensus is. I read a part of where the character appears/important scene for the character from canon before I start. Once I have the general idea of how the character basically is (appearance and personality wise) I begin writing him/her. While I'm writing, it's entirely my interpretation of the said character, as close to canon as possible.

I've written Fleur, Lily and McGonagall and at all times, I tried to stray off the characterisation we've already seen of them. To make them my own, I try and explore different sides of their personality which we've never seen previously in canon. Like I said earlier, doing a bit of homework on their character always helps. Before I wrote Minerva, for instance, I read her reaction to Dumbledore's death in HBP. And that really helped me write the opening lines of Love of a Kind that shows how she deals with his death. And reading the character-info of said character either on the Lexicon or on MN's encyclopedia gives a general idea of the character and helps get into their shoes.

[Dumbledore Prince]

Which characters do you find unfairly or improperly characterised by fandom as a whole? Do you abide by the fandoms characterisation of these minor character, or do you work straight from the source?

I think that Eileen Prince is one of the most unfairly portrayed minor characters in the fandom. Most writers of Eileen Prince prefer to show her as a woman who patronises the Dark Arts, when we have no real proof for it. The only reason they give for it is that she is Snape's mother. All right, perhaps she does love Snape (as J K Rowling hinted), but in my opinion, that isn't enough to make her a Dark Arts fanatic. After all, the parent-child bond is something very natural.

I prefer to work from the source, rather than go by the general fandom characterisation. Since we don't get any concrete aspects about their character from the books, we have a lot of leeway with them.

That's why, I decided to make her an anti-Dark Arts person in one of my stories.

Have you ever had someone criticise your characterisation of a minor canon character because they compared your version with a more common fandom version?

On the contrary, I've had praise from one person for my characterisation of Eileen in Snape's Folly (not from the writers on this site, though. Of course, it's been validated here). But I suppose I would have got more criticism if my story was more widely read.

[Valentinia]

Like others have said, I think that Cho, Parvati, Lavender and Padma are often terribly stripped of personality. (Here's a really great one with Parvati and Padma, though: http://fanfiction.mugglenet.com/viewstory.php?sid=30636).

As for me, I prefer to work "straight from the source" - new takes on old (but minor) characters are something I cherish and revere. However, I'm sure I've slipped into fanon a few times (although I always pictured Katie with light brown hair...), espcially when writing characters like the Marauders, who aren't characterized that much in the books, but about whom so many clichés exist.

As anyone who has read my fic "I Loved Him First" can probably tell, I enjoy writing things that are plausible with canon (meaning only the books, not interviews where JKR admits Petunia wasn't a witch *sob*), but that are unlike most other takes on that character.

I think, even if someone "messes up" and makes the character ooc, if nothing else, it helps the reader think about why a certain character would never do/say something like that, and when done well (which, actually, is very often the case) can give the reader a whole new perspective on a previously overlooked minor character.