Interesting debate

There's an interesting debate happening on John Scalzi's blog called What Authors Know About Their Characters. It was sparked off by JK Rowling's answer to a question about one of her characters, the now famous "Dumbledore is gay" answer. The main point in contention  seems to be, who is in control of the characters in a book - the author, or the readers? Who dictates the characters' realities? And what role does the reader play in the writer/reader collaboration?

I admit I tend toward Scalzi's point-of-view. I think the writer, whether the answer is there explicitly in the text or not, has the final say as to what a character is, or is not: what the character will be, or will not be. (I'm not including television in this - TV/movies are more of a collaborative effort in production) 

Letter number 2 takes a POV that I only semi agree with. Sure, when I read a book (any book) the mythos and characters and settings and wonderment of being in that author's mind become my own while I am reading; and even if I write fanfic, or read fanfic, or imagine my own adventures for those characters, they still aren't *mine*. They're the author's. The one who imagined it all up is the one who gets to say definitively what those characters are like. And a reader may change them however to suit them in their own imagination - but it's not going to ever be the way the original author/creator considered and "grew" them. 

Anyhow, opinions, anyone?

Drifting from an old old favorite...

Wow, this happened so gradually I hardly noticed it. I wouldn't say I'm a big fan, but I was following the comic strip For Better or For Worse online for a long time, since I don't get the newspaper. I used to look it up first thing after my computer booted up. And now, I've suddenly realized, I've only clicked on Lynn Johnston's site maybe once in the past three weeks, only after I read a comment about what's happening in some forum or other.

I guess I've basically dropped it because of lack of interest. I strongly disliked the retconning and character manipulation and where Johnston was taking her characters - especially out of the parameters she herself set for them years ago. She eschewed creative directions and embraced cliche. She limited her own characters' sense of adventure and brought them back into a claustophobic family world. Although always middle class, her characters hadn't ever been so mediocre.

Why am I bringing this up? If you take a look at my previous post, it does relate to the author's perogative to dictate the character's reality. There is a flip-side to that. If the author/creator has full authority over the development (or lack thereof) of his/her characters, when those same characters and storylines take a nose-dive for some of the audience, well, that creator is going to lose audience for their imagination. At the moment, Johnston's imagination and mine aren't running concurrently. I'm not enjoying being inside her mind. (I'm going from Stephen King's assertion that writing and storytelling is telepathy; it is exposing your mind and imagination for a shared experience. see his book "On Writing") 

Do I think Johnston gives a hoot that I no longer read her strip? Of course not. But I do. It's saddening when an old favorite isn't, anymore. It's like losing an old friend, simply because you've both changed enough that there's little in common.