J.K. Rowling launches new Harry Potter Website

[Michael]

[inked]

C-O-M-M-E-R-C-I-A-L-I-T-Y!

The problem with ebook formatting is that it is destined to be transient. So, buy the system for each format and maintain it so you'll be able to read it. Anyone else here remember the Fortran system? .................................

[Michael]

I don't think it's an eBook. I'm not sure what could be in play. Maybe an intermational musical adaptation? Maybe a stage play? Maybe a live action TV show? Maybe a radio drama?

[Michael]

And here is the long-awaited video in which J.K. Rowling explains "Pottermore".

Watch J.K. Rowling explains "Pottermore" from YouTube
SF-Fandom not responsible for video content



SF-Fandom reserves the right to remove inappropriate video content from its discussions. YouTube may remove the video from its service without notification.

[inked]

Clearly it is a commercial venture in which JKR gets authorial control over the ebooks and related materials. The future release of backstory/background/what-I-was-thinking is sure to ignite the debate over "What is canon?" - as interesting as the material may be.

Let me here and now assert that, as for JRRT and CSL et alia the canon is what is published in book format in paper and ink. Now, as a long-term fan of the genre and decades-long re-reader of all of the above, their canons consist of what they have printed. Their own revelations of backstory and background et cetera do not change the published canon. Note that in JRRT's case, changes made to THE HOBBIT in the later edition do not *magically* make all "right" with the imaginary world, the secondary creation, but they do make for some engaging discussions here and elsewhere.

I look for the same in regard to JKR and these subsequent "revelations" - but the canon is FIXED by publication.

[Michael]

While I understand your point of view, inked, I think the Internet and fan discussions have pushed the solubility of traditional definitions of "canon" to the very extreme limit of tolerance in terms of what can and should be applied as a source of authority. The inconsistencies between published editions and between published editions and their sources and between sources leads to all manner of speculation. But if JK Rowling's online disclosures are fully consistent with what is revealed in the books, then one has to ask why those disclosures cannot be accepted as canon.