Between The Pages Of A Book

I got tagged on Tumblr to talk about books that have touched me, and I thought I'd post here aswell.

1. A Quiet Belief In Angels - R.J Ellory. This book is actually a crime/mystery novel, but reads more like a classic. The prose in this book is absolutely incredible, and the way the author handles themes like mortality, death, and the ways in which your childhood can shape your identity is just fantastic. 
2. The Book Thief - Markus Zusak. This book speaks for its self. If you haven’t read it already, I  really suggest you do - a book has never, ever touched me as much as this one. Based in Nazi Germany it follows the tale of a girl named Liesel and is narrated by Death himself.
3. Freak The Mighty - Rodman Philbrick. I never realized when I was younger that this book was actually really popular before I started speaking about it  to people now, but this book had a really profound effect on me as a child.
4. Life After God - Douglas Coupland. The concept behind this book is very, very cool and Coupland has a very distinct writing style which just stays with you. It’s a series of short stories which details a society that is post-religion. 
5. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings - Maya Angelou. This is a book I really want to read again so I understand the true weight of it; because it’s  such an important read. Maya Angelou is one of the best writers in history and her autobiography brings to light  critical thinking  around race and identity, but in such an eloquent and hopeful way. 
6. The Knife Of Never Letting Go - Patrick Ness. I actually only read this last year but my god, this is so beautiful and emotional. I can’t wait to read the rest of his series.
7. The Yellow World - Albert Espinosa.  This book is really personal - but also very, very thoughtful and reflective. It’s super interesting in the way he structures it, too.
8. The Perks Of Being A Wallflower - Stephen Chbosky. Shock of the century right? No but seriously, this is like the first YA book i feel I was properly exposed to and it will always stay with me. I read it  at a time when I was fourteen and very alone and the concept of  being the ‘wallflower’ kept me going. 
9. The Looking Glass Wars - Frank Beddor. This was my favourite book growing up and remains very, very dear to me. Probably  is actually lame if I ever re-read it.
10. I Am An Emotional Creature - Eve Ensler. Eve is such a fantastic writer who understands the female identity, really, really well. 

HONORARY MENTIONS: Margeret Atwood  always touches the soul because she is the best, best best author ever and I love her to pieces and Kazuo Ishiguro for Never Let Me Go.

The Lines Within Story-telling

So J.K Rowling has discussed how she wished Harry and Hermoine had become a couple at the end of the Harry Potter series, and while this has ignited a debate abut whether people agree with that, it's also definitely making people think about the author/reader relationship.

And while everyone is on the topic of the readers having ownership over the narrative: (even though the idea of Hermoine and Harry makes me grumpy) I do fully believe that readers can contest ideas which are ‘cannon’ by authors; that they can criticize, re-imagine, interpret, and believe whatever they want.

 But I don’t believe that the authorial intent can be expanded on once the story is over. I love J.K and she has full right to reflect on her writing decisions, (as all authors do at the end of the day), but I don’t like the idea that once an author makes a claim after the book has been published, that every reader has to agree and believe that - because that claim is suddenly part of the narrative. It isn’t. Just like Dumbledore’s ‘supposed’ representation of homosexuality, it fails to be supported because it just felt like something J.K added in to make her seem ‘headline’ news worthy. Obviously a character representing the lgbt*q community’s plot should never just solely rely around that fact, (a character should not solely be written for queer representation, it should be fully fleshed out and complex like every other character) there is just no real evidence in the text to support it all.

And I think that's what's disappointing. If things aren't valid enough, they become really hard to believe.

I don't really think there is a clear cut answer to this debate, I think it's always a personal stance: But I do think my opinion is that if J.K wanted to write Harry and Hermoine, she probably should have,