Brooklyn Arden Review: "100 Saints You Should Know"

Reality is not simply there, it must be searched and won. -- Paul Celan

I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. That is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant. -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ultimately, literature is nothing but carpentry. With both you are working with reality, a material just as hard as wood. -- Gabriel Garcia Marquez

As I was thinking over what I admired about "100 Saints You Should Know," Kate Fodor's quietly excellent new play at Playwrights Horizons, the first quotation here sprang into my head. In searching my quote file for the exact wording and the attribution, I found the second quotation, which is relevant by virtue of its irrelevance to the question the play asks: why bad things happen and how to go on. And the third quote, like the first, underlines Ms. Fodor's and the cast's accomplishments: to have constructed a story and characters so genuine they seem to be real -- a house you can walk through and breathe in. The characters are five:
  • Theresa, a cleaner, never married
  • Matthew, one of her employers, a Catholic priest
  • Abby, Theresa's hellion of a teenage daughter
  • Colleen, Matthew's widowed Irish mother
  • Garrett, a teenage delivery boy

The play is a simple chain of conversations over the course of one night: between Theresa and Matthew in his rectory, just before his departure on a forced leave of absence (for possession of pictures of adult male nudes); Theresa and Abby in the girl's bedroom; Matthew and Colleen as they play Scrabble in her living room, she not knowing his "vacation" is mandatory; Matthew and Garrett just outside Colleen's house; Theresa, Matthew, and Colleen in the living room, after Theresa brings Matthew something he left in the rectory; Garrett and Abby as they wait outside for the adults. Then tragedy strikes -- an accident, inexplicable -- and the players are juggled round again, still always in domestic settings, rarely more than two of them onstage at a time.

There is no showiness to the play; there are no grand plots or grandiose desires. It is rather a story of people confused by their desires, for others, for goodness, or for God. They cannot escape the people they are, which leads to their lives of quiet desperation, and the situation that follows from those lives has even less rational explanation: There is neither good nor evil here (pace Dr. King), only the search for meaning in meaninglessness. But the characters' struggle to search and win a greater reality -- the possibility of redemption -- combined with their utter recognizability as people give them both dignity and poignancy.

In keeping with the spirit of the play, the performances feel restrained, letting the characters' pain carry the drama rather than overemphasizing it in the acting. (The exception was Zoe Kazan as Abby, but as Abby is a histrionic teenager, that may well have been intentional.) The scenic design by Rachel Hauck and costume design by Mimi O'Donnell is likewise elegant and in service to Ms. Fodor's themes. This is a wise and thoughtful play worthy of your time -- a marvelous portrayal of the characters' reality, and an enrichment of our own.

Writing Tips from the Presbyterians

I like the randomness of the clause after the colon and hence will not explain it: I was browsing the contributors' guidelines for Presbyterians Today magazine this afternoon (for a good work-related reason, I will add), and it included a great list of basic rules for writers from Writer's Digest magazine:
  1. Prefer the plain word to the fancy.
  2. Prefer the familiar word to the unfamiliar.
  3. Prefer the Saxon word to the Romance. (This one is slightly silly; see here.)
  4. Prefer nouns and verbs to adjectives and adverbs.
  5. Prefer picture nouns and action verbs.
  6. Never use a long word when a short one will do as well.
  7. Master the simple declarative sentence.
  8. Prefer the simple sentence to the complicated.
  9. Vary the sentence length.
  10. Put the word you want to emphasize at the beginning or end of your sentence.
  11. Use the active voice.
  12. Put the statements in a positive form.
  13. Use short paragraphs.
  14. Cut needless words, sentences and paragraphs.
  15. Use plain, conversational language.
  16. Avoid imitation. Write in your natural style.
  17. Write clearly.
  18. Avoid gobbledygook and jargon.
  19. Write to be understood, not to impress.
  20. Revise and rewrite. Improvement is always possible.

On Writing and Faith, and Thoughts Running Free

The sermon I gave earlier today can now be read here.

At the end of the service, we sang a stout old German peasants' song called "Die Gedanken Sind Frei," or "My Thoughts Are Free." I love the lyrics (though this translation is very different from Wikipedia's):

Die Gedanken sind frei
My thoughts freely flower,
Die Gedanken sind frei
My thoughts give me power.
No scholar can map them,
No hunter can trap them,
No one can deny:
Die Gedanken sind frei!

I think as I please
And this gives me pleasure,
My conscience decrees,
This right I must treasure;
My thoughts will not cater
To duke or dictator,
No one can deny--
Die Gedanken sind frei!

And if tyrants take me
And throw me in prison
My thoughts will burst free,
Like blossoms in season.
Foundations will crumble,
The structure will tumble,
And free men will cry:
Die Gedanken sind frei!

A Jane Austen Reading Calendar

Yesterday my mom called me to ask which Jane Austen novel her book club should read for October. This juxtaposition of author and month inspired me to try to match each of the six Jane Austen novels with the best time of year to read them, so I'm taking a brief break from working on my sermon (latest theme: "I Have No Idea What I'm Talking About, But God Loves Me Anyway") to post this here.

N.B.: If you're interested in Austen as a writer rather than as an author -- how she developed her style, her skills, her subject matter and themes -- the best way to read her is chronologically: the juvenilia, NA, S&S, P&P, MP, Emma, and Persuasion. (This is how I read her complete works for my Austen class in college, and it was amazingly instructive.) But if you're rereading, or just reading for pleasure, you might try the calendar below.

January-February: Northanger Abbey. The first of Austen's novels chronologically, NA is all about the pleasures of fiction -- reading it, imagining yourself into it, escaping to and from it -- so it's perfect for winter, when you want to insulate yourself against the dark and cold with hot chocolate and a hilarious book.

March-April: Mansfield Park. This most divisive and least read of Austen's novels is about purity and rebirth: holding fast to your principles in the face of temptation, and the moral rights and regeneration earned through that principled stand. If worst comes to worst and you loathe Fanny Price, you will have the pleasures of spring to help you through it.

May-June: Emma, so you can eat fresh strawberries while you read the Box Hill scene. (Mom's book group eventually settled on this one.)

July-August: Pride and Prejudice. Jane Austen chick lit, the novel most likely to have hot pink type and a brooding hottie on the cover . . . because it is great fun, "light and bright and sparkling," as the author herself said. Read it by the pool with a fruity drink.

September-October: Sense and Sensibility. There is a sharp and at times almost bitter tang to S&S: For long stretches of the book, nearly everything that can go wrong for these girls does, and every person who can be cruel to one or the other (intentionally or not) is, and they are so alone and so poor against the forces of their society . . . You can feel the autumn wind blow through its pages. But S&S is also about maturation: coming to flower, learning and accepting your limits, and letting go towards peace.

November-December: Persuasion. The last of Austen's novels chronologically is also the most suffused with feeling -- with tiny moments that make all the difference -- as gentle Anne Elliot, locked in emotional winter, receives a second chance to bloom. A book to warm you in the cold.

Quotidiana

I am not posting a lot this month because there is not a lot of stuff to report, useful or otherwise. Working. Finished A Prayer for Owen Meany, which I found nonplussing, and Forever, which was fascinating to me as a historical document but less so as fiction. Bought my first-ever item off eBay, a pretty patchwork purse; and two pairs of designer jeans from Loehmann's (love Loehmann's) and a new duvet cover for when it gets cold. Loved "Superbad." Ran today for the first time in two weeks. Writing my sermon for next Sunday, which keeps shooting off in new directions when it needs to stay under ten minutes, and which I hope is not merely words, words, words.

The best things I've eaten recently: sweet Italian sausage cooked with chunks of Granny Smith apples, which turned soft and hot, perfect with the meat. And Cones tiramisu gelato.

Three Minor News Items and Moving Pictures

  • I spent much of today reading and responding to SQUIDs, so if you sent one in the last, um, two months, you should receive a reply by the end of the week.
  • Barack Obama -- the man who I sincerely hope will be the next President of the United States, for his vision, fairmindedness, honesty, and dedication to consensus, and because people do not actively hate him -- will be speaking in Brooklyn next week. Get your tickets here.
  • I just joined FreeCycle in order to get rid of a vaporizer that was taking up space in my apartment, and it is a very neat thing.
  • Want to watch an excerpt from a book I'm editing? This is pretty much the first six chapters, except we won't have the funky music. (Check out this awesome fight scene too.)

Discount Theatre Tickets: "100 Saints You Should Know"

The good people of Playwrights Horizons are once again kind enough to offer a discount to my blog readers. And so:

100 SAINTS YOU SHOULD KNOW
A New Play by Kate Fodor
at Playwrights Horizons

August 24-September 30, 2007

Theresa (Janel Moloney) cleans the rectory of the local parish to support her unruly teenage daughter (Zoe Kazan). When its priest (Jeremy Shamos) leaves the church under uncertain circumstances and returns home to his protective mother (Lois Smith), Theresa finds herself compelled to pursue him. One eventful night joins them all, forcing a reckoning with the broken memories and shaken faith that divides them — and the discovery of a shared, tenuous common ground. Written by Kate Fodor (Hannah and Martin) and directed by Ethan McSweeny (Broadway revival of The Best Man, Never the Sinner), 100 Saints also features the distinguished cast of two-time Tony Award nominee and Drama Desk winner Lois Smith (The Trip to Bountiful), two-time Emmy Award nominee Janel Moloney (TV's "The West Wing"), Zoe Kazan (Sam Mendes' upcoming film "Revolutionary Road"), Obie Award winner Jeremy Shamos (Gutenberg! The Musical!), and Will Rogers.

Save over 35% when your order by September 18th!
$40 (Regular $65) for all performances August 24th through September 2nd.
$50 (Regular $65) for all performances September 4th through September 30th.
Performances Tuesday through Friday at 8 PM, Saturday at 2 and 8 PM,
and Sunday at 2:30 and 7:30 PM.

To Order: 1. Online at http://www.playwrightshorizons.org/ or http://www.ticketcentral.org/ and use the code SABL. 2. Call Ticket Central at (212) 279-4200 (Noon to 8 PM daily) and mention the code SABL when ordering. 3. In person by visiting our box office (Noon to 8 PM daily) at 416 West 42nd Street (between 9th and 10th) and mention the code SABL.

Seven Reasons Why People Love Harry Potter

There has been much discussion of late on "Why Harry Potter?" -- why did these books break through, when so many other books haven't? What makes them special? Why does everyone care? I wrote out my theories for child_lit today and cross-post the message here.

1. Relateability. In Book 1, J. K. Rowling is a genius at getting you to sympathize with Harry -- first through showing you the Dursleys, who are so awful that you automatically like anyone they dislike (and you enjoy disliking them); then through his difficult circumstances; then when things start to happen to him -- a story is gathering around him, with owls and letters from no one and giants; he is clearly someone worth following. (I've written more about this here.) Beyond that, in all the early books, Harry is such a decent Everyhero that he is hard not to like; and all the people around him generally fit into the pattern of being either people the reader likes as well (the Weasleys, Dumbledore, Luna) or else people we enjoy disliking (the Dursleys, Hermione before the troll, Malfoy, Snape).

Harry's everyday experiences are also enormously relateable: Even though he's fighting off a Dark Lord who wants to kill him, what he's really thinking about a lot of the time is his friends, and homework, and mean teachers, and girls, and the mean rich kid, and sports practice -- the everyday life of many kids, which readers recognize and connect with. His life is not all excitement; it is not all sad; it is not all funny, and that variance in tone reflects real life as well.

And then the overarching arc: Ms. Rowling traces the entire seven-year course of Harry's teenage maturation with a wise and excellent eye for real adolescent emotional development, and for narrative development too; from the simple "Yay School!" atmosphere of Book 1, to the family history of Book 3, to dealing with death in Book 4, to Harry's discovery of seemingly every single adult's feet of clay in Book 5, to his taking control of his destiny in Book 7 . . . Even though the details will be different for we Muggle non-orphans, I think we readers recognize the truth of this process in our own lives -- the unfolding of information as we grow up, and our growing with it.

2. Accessibility. The wizarding world is just like ours, with a magical twist: The staircases might move, or the clock might tell you "You're Late," or the billboards advertise magical broomsticks and cleaners in language very much like that of our Muggle advertisements for boring broomsticks and cleaners. Because it's so recognizable, it is not a hard fantasy world to enter -- much easier to fall into than, say, Tolkien's, as the settings are so comfortably domestic and there isn't another language or unfamiliar creatures to decipher; plus we have the humor and pleasure of recognizing the wizard twists on our Muggle lives ("I think Mum has a second cousin who's an accountant, but we don't talk about him much").

On a different note, there has been much turning-up of noses here about the surface of her prose and whether she is a good writer. To my mind she is very much in the style of C.S. Lewis's writing for children: brilliant -- absolutely brilliant -- at showing-not-telling -- at creating an image in the reader's mind, giving just enough details to make you intrigued and leaving just enough else to the imagination. She does not overexplain, she does not tell you what to feel (beyond the adverbs and dialogue tags, I admit -- but note there were MANY fewer of those in DH); we readers see, experience, and feel everything right along with Harry, which is partly why we come to care about him so much. And *that* is the most important kind of good writing, especially for children; it doesn't matter how beautiful the prose is if you aren't there with the character in the moment.

Finally, she is really and truly funny, with humor both highbrow (the accountant above) and low (the firecrackers that "resolutely spell out POO"), and nothing warms a reader to a book like enjoying a joke in it.

3. Complexity. Part of the reality of the series is the acknowledgement that things are very rarely simple, especially people. James Potter as a teenager was an arrogant toerag; Voldemort had an unhappy childhood; Severus Snape loved Lily Evans; Sirius Black died partly because of his own impetuosity; Narcissa Malfoy spares Harry; Dumbledore wanted to rule Muggles and death. Though the good vs. evil lines are clearly drawn here, nearly every character has mitigating factors or shades of gray. (This may just be one of MY personal reasons to love Harry Potter, but it's an accomplishment worth noting.)

4. Mystery. Has anyone since Dickens plotted like J. K. Rowling? (And even Dickens only did it in one book -- I am thinking of Bleak House here, but bow to anyone's superior knowledge.) Seven books, the keys to the climax of the seventh laid in the first, a mystery in each book feeding into the mystery of the whole; red herrings and clues in plain sight (in retrospect) and characters mentioned in passing in one book blooming into central importance later; her incredible authorial control of her backstory, and incredible restraint, in never giving away a word more than she wants the reader to know at any one moment.

5. Authority. By which I mean in this context, the reader's sense that an author is in control of the story, and we can let go and relax into it -- the sense that she knows Harry's great-grandfather's middle name, the wizarding history back to the arrival of wizards in Britain and Harry's history forward through all seven books; that she has a destiny in mind for Harry and we can trust her to reveal that destiny to us, step by step. This trust in an authority is such a comforting thing to have, especially in these uncertain days of global warming and stupid presidents and economic fluctuations, and we readers take that comfort wherever we can get it.

6. Community. Harry Potter was published in the U.S. in 1998, right at the beginning of the dot-com boom, when everyone was first making web pages or joining chat rooms or logging onto AOL. And as people discovered the books, and especially their increasing complexity as the series went on, they wanted to theorize about the mysteries and write more stories about the characters and tease out the literary and linguistic connections and, in general, play in JKR's world. All we readers got to know other people all around the world through this process; and then we were logging on not just to discuss Harry but to hang out with our friends, so we spent even MORE time discussing Harry. July 21 in New York felt like New Year's Eve or Halloween -- a gigantic party, the entire city (or my little corner of it) united to count down to and celebrate an event -- a book!

7. Pleasure. Glory, so much pleasure, from all the things I've listed above: discovering the world, hanging out with her characters, feeling and thinking through their adventures, talking about them with friends. I hope my (theoretical) kids have the chance to experience something like this someday, and I hope I get to go through it all again too.

In Which "Shaft" Once Again Saves the Day

So I had a pretty good run in this morning's New York City Half-Marathon: one beautiful loop of Central Park -- a 10K -- in an hour flat; a thrilling lope through the canyons of Seventh Avenue and Times Square, people cheering from the sidewalks, the roads car-free and mine; a hard right down 42nd Street, taxis still streaming by on the other side of the barrier; and a long slog down the West Side Highway, four miles of bare concrete and ravelling will. I didn't train as well for this half-marathon as I did for the one last October -- I skipped a lot of the cross-training, and my longest training run was just 10.5 miles -- so by the 10th mile, I was starting to bargain with myself: "At 11 miles you can walk for a minute . . . You don't need water now, just keep going . . ." I made it through the 11th mile without walking (deals with myself are designed to be broken), but as the 12th mile marker approached, my right leg aching and my running playlist nearly complete, I was seriously contemplating giving up my goal of beating 2:09:26, my record from last year, and switching to a nice, limping stroll.

And then -- and then -- Shaft saved the day. Or more precisely, Isaac Hayes's "Theme from 'Shaft'" saved the day: tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa tissahissa CHA bim bim bewbimawackakakuh bim bim . . . As the beat sizzled on, I started to smile, then grinned outright; for what would Shaft say if he knew I was thinking about quitting? I would lose my hard-won badass status from last year, and be a bad mother(shutting my mouth) -- and not in the good way. I picked up the pace, listened to the theme twice in that last mile and a tenth, and finished at 2:09:04, a solid 22 seconds off my previous record. (My pace also improved by exactly one second -- a 9:51 mile on average -- which means that if I do a half-marathon a year with this same improvement, I'll hit the female winner's pace of 5:23 in 2274.) So I extend my thanks to Mr. Hayes and Mr. Roundtree for their inspiration and excellent style . . . and I'm going to listen to that song one more time.

Cards and Characters

This has not been a very good week -- I lost my keys and wallet somewhere in Brooklyn, I've had a touch of post-Harry depression, and work is neverending, even though it's August. So: no posts. However, I had a great dinner at Sorrel on Thursday and an excellent coffee with author Francisco Stork yesterday, and I saw "The Simpsons Movie," so things are looking up.

  • I just accepted an invitation to speak at the New Jersey SCBWI conference June 6-7, 2008, in Princeton. I have no idea what I will be talking about as yet, so suggestions are welcome.
  • But I'll be speaking about character and possibly voice on November 10 at the Missouri SCBWI conference in St. Louis. My working question for this is "What makes a great character?" which leads me to my question for you all: When I say "a great character," who springs to mind for you? My immediate answers are Jack Aubrey and Stephen Maturin; Severus Snape; Elizabeth Bennet; Rose Casson; Harriet Welsch; Rupert Campbell-Black; Lyra Belacqua (in The Golden Compass); Anne Shirley (in Anne of Green Gables) . . . Your nominations?
  • On this same topic, from Living the Romantic Comedy: A great post on authentic characters.
  • I will also be speaking at my church -- giving a lay sermon, actually -- at the service on August 26, talking about the Word and the word. I'm really looking forward to thinking about this and writing this.
  • Here's an interview with Philip Pullman on something of those same topics (via Educating Alice).
  • And also on Educating Alice, an interesting discussion of race in HP.
  • I keep remembering random things stuck in my wallet: my video-rental card; a photo of my family; a gift card to UNIQLO; a Maneki Neko card from Katy, which I carried for good luck; a partially filled Subway sandwich card; the key to a file cabinet at work . . . All these things still out there in the world, waiting patiently in someone else's bag or at the bottom of a grate or trash can, much of it meaningless without me.
  • But I've been forced to realize or remember how dependent I am upon electronic networks: no credit cards, no driver's license (and you need a credit card to order a new one online), only a temporary ATM card to keep me afloat (and I'm enormously grateful for that). We are all identity-theft movies waiting to happen.
  • Tomorrow is the New York City Half-Marathon, so if you're out and about in Manhattan very early tomorrow morning, wave hello as I run by!
  • And this leads me to my favorite Internet application this year: The Google Maps pedometer, which tells you the distance and even possibly the calories burned of any route you map out. It's terrific.
  • Anyone seen "Becoming Jane" yet? I want to both gag AND hiss every time I pass a poster.
  • Finally, from the Onion, the last word in Harry Potter spoilers.

Interns Wanted

If you'll be in New York this fall, you're passionate about really great children's and YA books, and you have eight to ten hours to spare during the business week, you're welcome to apply for an internship with Arthur A. Levine Books. Our interns help us track, read, and respond to manuscripts; perform basic clerical tasks like opening the mail and making copies; and complete special projects based on personal interests and need. The position is unpaid, but if you're a college student, we will do whatever's necessary to see that you get college credit -- and there are always lots of free books around the office! Preference goes to college students and people interested in pursuing an editorial career in children's publishing, but anyone is welcome to apply. For more information, see our FAQ page here.

Racing for the Cure 2007

Longtime readers will know that every year, I run the Susan B. Komen Race for the Cure in honor of my grandmother, Carol Sadler, who died of breast cancer in 2003. It's always an awesome, inspiring event, as 20,000 people stream through Central Park to fight a disease that kills more than 40,000 women and men each year. I'm running it again in 2007, and again organizing a Carleton College alumni team to participate as well. The race is Sunday, September 9, at 9 a.m. If you would be interested in joining us, please follow this link (you don't have to be a Carletonite to be on the team); or if you'd like to contribute to the cause, click here.

And either way, thank you, very much.

Where the Magic Happens

Off a meme from Elizabeth Bunce/Susan Taylor Brown:


This is where I do a good two-thirds (let's say) of my reading, writing, and editing -- in a battered yellow wing chair my dear friend Katy purchased from the City Opera Thrift Shop seven years ago, then kindly bequeathed to me when she left for Old Blighty. I set my cup of tea on the side knob, put my feet up on the file box, rest the clipboard and a manuscript on my lap, and mess with sentences. A board balanced between the chair arm and the bed holds finished MS pages, and in summer a box fan by my feet keeps me cool. It's all quite cozy and comfortable and lovely. . . . Now if only they'd let me replace my chair at work with a La-Z-Boy.
P. S. Also via Susan's livejournal, I love the idea of Tell an Author You Care Day. It's past now -- it happened July 16 -- but it's never too late to show your favorite writer some love.

Back to Harry: News (including Incredible Famousness), Thoughts, and a Theory

(This cartoon of Harry drawn by my friend Jeremiah, who has an excellent webcomic called Five Bucks to Friday.)
Do we need more spoiler space? Here:

MERLIN'S PANTS

MERLIN'S PANTS

MERLIN'S PANTS

MERLIN'S PANTS

MERLIN'S PANTS

MERLIN'S PANTS

First the news: The first of the "Today Show" interviews with Jo yielded some wonderful tidbits on the trio's future careers, what happened to Luna, and Jo's feelings about Snape; check out the article and video. The second part of the interview will air tomorrow at 7:30 a.m. EST, the third at 7 p.m. Sunday on Dateline (you should double-check that Sunday time).

Also, if you didn't see the Colbert Report opening, it's hee-larious.

We have found one verified typo in the U.S. edition thus far, which I am announcing so none of you HP fans write to us about it when you discover it yourselves: "suceeded," on page 5. We are disappointed, of course, because we always want to make the most perfect book possible; but given that the book is 784 pages and we're only human, we'll cut ourselves some slack.

And my personal period of Incredible Famousness comes to a close this week with a brief profile in one of my favorite magazines, "Entertainment Weekly." I don't know if any of it's online -- I actually haven't even seen the article yet, and I have my fingers crossed about the picture that's supposed to accompany it. . . . The magazine also profiles Arthur and Jo's terrific longtime publicist, Kris Moran.

Next, thinking a little bit more about the epilogue: I think some of what we're seeing in the split over the epilogue is the split between readers who feel like there's too much infodump in that section and therefore dislike its style; and readers who are like, "Dump! Dump! Dump! Rain that sweet information down!" But it is hard to satisfy the latter readers without further inflaming the former: If you're disappointed with the epilogue because it didn't include the trio's careers, for example, imagine the exceeding awkwardness of "Then Harry turned to Hermione and said, 'So, how are things in the Department of Magical Law Enforcement? We're really revolutionizing things over in the Auror Department! And have you had a letter from Luna recently? Wonder if she found those Blibbering Humdingers in Bolivia, ho ho ho!'" I think the author came to the right balance in the end, with a scene that showed us all the essential things discussed below without going too far in the dumpy direction. I can't imagine the book without it, myself -- how cold it would have felt, to know only that they survived, and not that they achieved all the happiness it showed . . .

Finally, here's my personal theory regarding Teddy Lupin: I've always figured he was raised by his grandmother, Andromeda Tonks. As her daughter, son-in-law, and husband would be dead, she'd want to keep this remaining member of her family close; and Harry, at 17, may have been able to defeat Lord Voldemort and all his Death Eaters, but I doubt he was equipped to care for a screaming one-month-old.

(Having written that, my continuity editor instincts kick in and I think, Wait, is it really a month? How much time passes between Lupin's appearance at Shell Cottage and the trio's departure for Gringotts? Isn't it more like a week or two? But I'm going to give myself a break here and not check it in the book. :-) )

Now for Something Completely Un-HP-Related: Recent Romantic Comedies

Warning: spoilers for "Knocked Up" and "Waitress" ahead.

If you're interested in romantic comedy as a genre, don't miss David Denby's terrific article in last week's "New Yorker" on its twentieth-century development in film, and particularly the current spate of male-slacker vs. female-striver movies. (And click quick, as I don't know how long that link will last.)

Exhibit A in his discussion: The very funny "Knocked Up," from the writer-director Judd Apatow. I liked "Knocked Up" a lot, but I agree with Mr. Denby that the romance is distinctly underdeveloped; it seems like Apatow knew those two people would never actually fall in love (or, let's face it, that she would never fall in love with him), so he cut around it as much as possible and focused on the relationship between the two couples instead. On the other hand, there IS a fantastic romantic moment in Act III of the film: Ben moves out of the slacker house, gets a job in web development, and decorates his apartment with an amazing semblance of taste for the man who came up with "Fleshofthestars.net." In other words, he sacrifices his previous unproductive lifestyle in favor of the woman he loves (sort of) and the child they'll have (he hopes).

And sacrifice is pretty much Tool #1 in the romance-creator's arsenal: Darcy giving up his pride (and entire previous character) for Elizabeth, Jack giving up his life for Rose (yes, my second "Titanic" reference in two days -- again, shut up), Randolph Henry Ash giving up his right to his daughter, a whole lot of bachelors giving up their all-business-all-the-time lives in bad category romances. (There ought to be some examples of women making sacrifices here too -- romance ought to run both ways -- but because the genre is generally designed to please women rather than men, it's usually the men who change.) Ben's decision to get a life, and his follow-through on it, made "Knocked Up" unexpectedly Austenian for a film that contains the line "Steely Dan can gargle my balls," but the ending is quite appropriately un-Austenian and uncertain for these uncertain romantic times: They'll love their child, live with each other, and see how things go.

I also think there's a very interesting comparison to be made between "Knocked Up" and "Waitress" -- another film about unplanned pregnancy by an undesirable father, but this one written and directed by a woman, the late Adrienne Shelley. It's a charming little film -- one of the best examples of directorial "voice" I've seen recently -- but outside its fairy-tale cinematography and ending, it's deadly realistic about how pregnancy ties the protagonist Jenna (the woman, I'd like to emphasize) to her awful, abusive, controlling husband, and to her dead-end life. Jenna hates her baby, truly and virulently, for a good deal of the movie, which impressed me a lot because it made me so uneasy. A gift from her mentor enables her to kick the husband out, and she eventually decides to drop her unreliable married lover as well in order to focus on her baby and what's best for her -- another fictional choice that really impressed me with its guts: getting rid of all the useless men in favor of a matriarchy with pies. "Waitress" isn't meant to be a romantic comedy, I don't think, so it's not trying to do the same things as "Knocked Up"; but stylized as it was, its women and their choices felt much more real to me, and taken seriously to me, than Katherine Heigl in the latter. . . .

I want to see new-millennium remakes of "Adam's Rib," "It Happened One Night" ("The Sure Thing" (sigh) was twenty years ago now -- we're due for a new take), and "His Girl Friday" -- great romances where the men and women are equals in work and in one-liners. I want more women to write and direct romantic comedies (or really anything). I want more male directors to pay attention to women -- Judd Apatow is actually great at women's characters and issues, comparatively speaking. I want Michael Bay to have to direct a romantic comedy and not get to blow one single thing up. I want romantic comedy to explore marriage, living together, break-ups, friendships after break-ups, hook-ups, serial monogamy, all the interesting dimensions of love and sex outside the standard one-true-love courtship model. (Actually, this probably means I want "Sex and the City," simply because it had the time and characters to work all the complexities.) I want romantic comedy as a genre to stop being identified and dismissed as "women's pictures," and more great relationship stories on/from both sides of the Y-chromosome divide.

Also, I want a pony.

But these things are possible. People: Go write them.

Some Thoughts on "Deathly Hallows"

MAJOR


SPOILERS


FOLLOW;


THANK


MERLIN


WE


CAN


DISCUSS


THIS


AT


LAST!


I’ve spent a good deal of the last two days reading comments on various websites about Deathly Hallows and talking to friends about their opinions. And while I really, really, really don’t want to debate here or apologize (in the rhetorical sense) for every plot point readers dislike, I’d like to write a little about two things that keep coming up in the reactions, and that deserve further thought before everyone hates on them completely. For the record, I have no special insight into these subjects beyond that of a reader who’s had the privilege of thinking about them for seven months rather than twenty-four hours; and this is also of course only my interpretation: I am definitely not speaking for J. K. Rowling or Scholastic or anyone else.

The Deathly Hallows: “What is their point?” some readers gripe. “What role do they serve in this book?” "She had the Horcruxes, she had to add another magical device?" This series, like any fantasy novel in which the characters wield magic, and like much of children’s literature in general, is at its thematic heart very much about power: who has it, how far it goes, the wise use of it, if it should be used at all. Voldemort is obsessed with it, like most evil overlords are, and he sees it as unequivocally good: the more, the better. And this approach parallels his obsession with death, which he sees as unequivocally bad: a weakness (the opposite of power), a failure.

The Hallows combine these two obsessions in three objects and use them to test Harry’s character: Will he chase down the Hallows? Will he take the ultimate power over death? That is certainly what Voldemort would do, if he knew all three existed; it was what Dumbledore wanted to do, when he was the age Harry is in this book; and it would provide Harry with the conventional means of destroying Voldemort—accumulating greater firepower (emphasis on the “power” there) with the Elder Wand, rather than undermining him from within by chipping away at the Horcruxes.

And Harry rejects them. He keeps his Cloak, but drops the stone somewhere in the Forest (there’s a fanfic waiting to be written); and most significantly, he decides not to keep the Elder Wand: He rejects fame, power, and immortality in favor of normalcy and a sandwich. I am not well-versed enough in epic fantasy conventions to know how unusual this is in the genre, the decision that the best use of power is abstention from it; but it is the perfect ending for Harry’s story, when he’s constantly been the victim of power, from page one with his parents’ deaths. His decision proves him truly the opposite of Voldemort, because his understanding of love, power, and death is so much richer and deeper than Tom Riddle’s; and he would not have been able to make that choice (that key J. K. Rowling word," choice") if he were not confronted with it in the form of the Hallows.

And this leads me to the epilogue. It is not receiving much love, I see—some people hate it because it doesn’t answer all their questions, some people hate it because it gives answers they don’t want, and some people just find it cheesy. I think it paid off five essential themes of the series (not just the book):

  1. Family. At the beginning of this series, who was Harry? A boy without a family, orphaned, friendless, belonging to no community, unhappy in the family he did live with, who gave him no love. At the end, he not only has a wife and children who love him (and whom he loves), he has a godson, many brothers-in-law, all their wives and children, and the acceptance of the full wizarding community.
  2. Maturity. Harry’s son’s name signifies that Harry has come to recognize Snape’s sacrifice and supreme courage (“Sometimes I think we sort too soon”), and to value those virtues over the pettiness with which Snape treated him at Hogwarts. Such a judgment is the mark of a intelligent, thoughtful, and empathetic adult, so it shows us that Harry has grown up and become wise.
  3. Fame. We see that Harry is happy being simply a father like the other fathers, and when all the kids on the train are gawking at him, he (and Ron) accept it matter-of-factly, rather than displaying the awkwardness that’s stalked him since his first visit to the Hogwarts Express in Book 1.
  4. Choice. He tells Albus essentially what Dumbledore told him in Book 2 -- “It is our choices, far more than our abilities, that show who we truly are” -- carrying that wisdom into the next generation.
  5. Power, or Where Real Happiness Comes From. Repeating a bit things I’ve said above . . . The epilogue is resolutely domestic, with kids squabbling and dads talking about parking—it’s a scene straight out of typical middle-class family life, plus wands. As far as we know from it, Harry is not powerful, he is not super-important, he does not wield any significant power. He is just a dad who loves his family. This, I think, may be part of the reason why people dislike the epilogue so much—the Chosen, special one, the Boy Who Lived, the one we’ve identified with all this time, has become just a regular guy, which means (by fictional standards especially) that frankly his life is a little boring. But J. K. Rowling is showing us clearly that he’s finding his happiness in everyday love and domestic life rather than big fantasy heroism—he is a Jane Austen and not a World of Warcraft hero in the end. And that is a kind of happy ending we can all aspire to: “All was well.”

Finally, some things I love about the book (not all, but some):

  • I had to say this line out loud every time I read it: “Vot is the point of being an international Quidditch player if all the good-looking girls are taken?”
  • I found a liveblog somewhere where a reader remarked, “I knew Regulus Black was R.A.B. as soon as I saw the handwriting!” This made me throw my arms in the air and shout “YES!”, as we deliberately set the handwriting on the door in the same font as the note to give readers (and Harry) precisely that clue and payoff. Yay!
  • Also a good liveblog: The Onion AV Club read.
  • “The Silver Doe” is my favorite chapter in the book. I love the wonder of the doe; the miracle of Ron’s return; the awkwardness in the conversation that follows; the pure Ron-torture the locket puts him through (so much delicious pain!); the Harry and Ron hug afterward; and Hermione beating Ron up, because he does totally deserve it. It’s heartrending and hilarious.
  • You know what JKR is amazing at? Hairpin emotional turns. Consider all the emotions in that chapter, or in the “Tale of the Two Brothers” or the “Deathly Hallows” chapter, from Harry’s broodiness to the lightness of the radio program (other people, at last!) to the terror at the Snatchers . . . I am so right there with them the whole time. And that ability to pull you into the moment and direct your emotions with ease is one of the things that makes J. K. Rowling such an incredible and popular writer.
  • Ron's line about Death having an Invisibility Cloak -- I don't have my book with me, but it's something like "Sometimes he gets tired of running at them and shouting 'Woo! Woo!'" To me that just encapsulated Rowling's magic and humor and interest in death all in a single one-liner.
  • The beginning of the "Wandmaker" chapter, where Harry digs Dobby's grave.
  • The brilliant payoff for Sirius's mirrors, and Aberforth in general -- I really liked him.
  • Jane Austen would have LOVED the fact that Hermione and Ron only kiss after he has expressed his sincere concern over the house-elves—thus demonstrating the completion of his moral education, and therefore his worthiness of Hermione’s love. I love it too.
  • The professors defending Hogwarts in the "Battle" chapter: McGonagall waking the suits of armor and telling the desks to "CHARGE!", Trelawney hitting crystal balls, Grubbly-Plank dropping Venomous Tentacula -- in the midst of the grief and chaos, these touches were delightfully funny and in character with the magical world.
  • Snape's last request for Harry to look at him, and "the green eyes meeting the black" -- I gasped out loud when I hit that line and realized what it meant.
  • I do not cry at books much. I did not really cry when Dumbledore or Sirius died—I had my arms over my head, sure, but my eyes were dry, and I didn't really cry through most of the deaths here. But I wept as I’ve never wept at a book before throughout the chapter where Harry is going to meet Voldemort. Sacrifices for others always do this to me; it's what made me cry in "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" (a comparison a lot of readers are drawing) and in "Titanic" (shut up).
  • Another favorite line: "Do not pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living, and above all, pity those who live without love."
  • Did everyone notice the lack of adverbial dialogue tags in this book? If you did not, do. :-) $300 million bucks -- or however large her fortune is -- and she still listens to her critics and uses what's useful.

ETA: For more thoughts on the epilogue and a theory on Teddy Lupin, click here.

On Harry Eve

Exactly 24 hours from the minute I'm writing this sentence, people will rush toward boxes, grab bound stacks of paper from them, and read as though nothing else on earth mattered. And while Muggles (and Roger) may scoff at the term, it truly is a magic moment: a reunion with old friends; the beginning of a great adventure; an experience shared with millions of other people around the world, when our world so rarely unites in love of anything, much less a book. I remember my pure joy when I first laid hands on Goblet of Fire at a midnight release party in Leawood, Kansas -- the longed-for story, mine at last -- and I wish you all that joy, and all the reading pleasure that follows.

The colophon at the back of the American edition of Deathly Hallows mentions a number of people involved in its production, but many others deserve recognition and remembrance for their roles in bringing this book to readers:

  • Emma Matthewson, the Bloomsbury editor
  • Isabel Ford, the Bloomsbury desk editor -- my "continuity editor" counterpart in the UK, who (with Emma) did truly heroic work
  • Rachel Griffiths and Emily Clement, editor and editorial assistant at AALB
  • Susan Casel, Veronica Ambrose, and Cheryl Weisman, our copyeditors/proofreaders
  • Francine Colaneri and Kirk Howle in supply and manufacturing
  • Ed Swart, who managed the shipping
  • Mark Seidenfeld and Dev Chatillon, our HP legal team, and Teresa Connelly, who supported us through many late nights
  • Rachel Coun and Suzanne Murphy, the marketing managers, and Katy Coyle, who oversees the Harry material on Scholastic.com
  • Kris Moran, Kyle Good, and Sara Sinek, who coordinated all the publicity
  • Francesco Sedita and his Creative Services staff
  • Alan Smagler, Mary Marotta, and Margaret Coffee, our heads of sales
  • and Ellie Berger and Lisa Holton, who oversee everyone

Finally, if you are home at 11:35 p.m. EST tonight (Friday) -- awaiting delivery of your copy on Saturday, surely -- you can tune in to "Nightline" on ABC for an interview-cum-profile of me and my work on the HP books. A camerawoman actually came to Queens with me this past evening for the Harry and the Potters concert (which was fantastic), so besides shots of my unnaturally neat office and unprecedentedly made-up face, you can see me and several of my friends rocking out to "Save Ginny Weasley" and "Stick It to Dolores." Good times! (There will be one more item in this Parade of Incredible Famousness, coming next week, and then midnight strikes, the mice run home, and I revert to being a happily behind-the-scenes mild-mannered children's book editor. But in the meantime, it's fun.)

The happiest of Harry days to you all!

And the Incredible Famousness Continues!

I was (very briefly) a guest on NPR's "Talk of the Nation" this afternoon, discussing my role as continuity editor and two errors that can be found in the series; the audio is not yet available, but should be up here shortly. In the meantime, if you seriously need an AALB-HP radio fix, you can listen to Arthur's NPR interview from Weekend Edition Saturday, available here. (Fun fact: He received the orchid in the background of his picture on that page from Linda Sue Park after Book 6, with the message "R.I.P. [character who dies in Book 6]." Kind Linda.)