Hello, my Little Toilers.

Before getting back into things, I wanted to leave you a few quotes that directly relate to the next few parts, rather than attempt to splice them sloppily into the text.

Back in 2005, there was a press conference in Edinburgh. J.K. Rowling was asked if there was anything she would have changed from books 1 through 5.

"I have now been writing Harry Potter for 15 years, so I've had lots of time to refine the plot, the course of the narrative, so I do not think I would change that."

Look at how much time she spent perfecting these books. And see how that includes Goblet of Fire? She never envisioned that story to be told any differently.

Before the show premiered, she was reported as saying:

"The story only exists because the right group of people came together with a brilliant idea about how to present Harry Potter on stage."

A brilliant idea. The right group.

Back to that BBC interview with Will, he asked:

Just so we're clear. I mean obviously, you're the writer, Jack, you're the director, John, and you're the creator, Jo, but you're all credited as writers. How did that actually work in practice?

Tiffany: Well, the three of us kind of talked, and discussed, and cogitated the story through discussions...

Rowling: Yeah.

Tiffany: ...which Jack then wrote down. And we didn't start writing the play, as such, or Jack didn't... until we'd agreed on what that story was.

Thorne: Absolutely. And then I tried to write a script...

Rowling: Well you did write a script. He's very self-deprecating. No, Jack produced an amazing script.

Ah-stounding. There was no argument that they shouldn't all be credited in the creation of the play. The finished script was amazing, in fact!

Colin Callender, one of the producers, wanted to express their concerns about the fanbase.

"We felt a real responsibility both to Jo, but also to the fans to get it right. And we were conscious to do right by the fans."

That's a weighty responsibility, Colin. Weight-ee, in-deed. Director John Tiffany expanded on this concern.

"We wanted to develop the characters that are already known and keep that consistency, but also introduce new ones."

Ah! Consistency. Did we mean canon consistency, or...just putting Harry and magic in a play? Bah. Details. I mean, his name's in the title. That should do the trick.

Speaking of Harry Potter, here's what Jamie Parker, the 36-year-old actor who plays the famous wizard, had to say on the subject.

"These are stories that people have lived with for their whole lives...and now they're adults re-joining the tale, picking it up where they left off..."

Yes, right where we left off. JKR mentioned that in her interview with The Observer.

"The epilogue of the seventh book is a very clear pointer as to where I was interested in going. It's very obvious from that epilogue that the character I was most interested in was Albus Severus Potter."

Was it that obvious? I was too busy looking at Harry. And Ginny. And Ron, Hermione, Draco...you know the people we've known for more than a hundred words. Maybe I read it wrong. Should I be concerned that I'm reading everything wrong? Hmm. Here's JKR sharing her own concerns in an exchange with her co-writers:

Rowling: "I've been awake since 4am. We were in the theater last night and I saw a scene that's very close to my heart, in costume, on the set, and it was quite overwhelming."

Tiffany: "Jo has been around for a lot of the process."

That's interesting. So, what you're saying is that she's was fully aware of the production. Could offer her suggestions, even? And a scene very close to her heart. She must have really put her soul into this play.

AHH! It's a Horcrux!

I need to stop attacking it!

I'm such a total Potterhead. Hey, you know who else is?

Thorne: "I was a total Potterhead. I still consider myself a Potterhead, and I hope the Potterheads don't hate me so much after this that I am never allowed to be one again."

Oh...Oh, ho ho ho... Jackie, you ol' scoundrel, you. Tempting me like that... I won't give you the pleasure. JKR considers you that way, though, don't she?

Rowling: "From the moment he produced the first outline, I thought bingo, that's it."

Ah! There it is. BINGO! Out with the old idea that spawned this entire enterprise about orphan Harry living with the Dursleys, and in with Back to the Future 2: The Return to Hogwarts! I mean, she spent sooo many years on all those other books, why take time to do it yourself. Oh, no no no. Pick a hat off the shelf. That'll do!

Why didn't you attempt it yourself, Jo? Tell us, won't you.

"I am not so arrogant that I think when you've got an absolutely top-class playwright offering to do it that I'm going to say, 'Well, I've never done it before, but I'll do it.' It's a question of knowing the limits of your own competence. I was reasonably involved in the Potter scripts. I'm more familiar with that world. I felt a degree of confidence writing a screenplay, but I had supreme confidence that Jack was going to write the play that I was going to love and he has. So you can't ask fairer than that."

Nope. No you cannot. If you worked hand-in-hand on the Potter scripts, knowing the story and already approving of the outcomes, why not loosen your grip? It's good for the soul, I hear. Plus, you never REALLY wanted to write more, did you? I mean, there was all that "never say never" stuff with Oprah.

"I always said never say never. And the reason I said that was truthfully that I did have this residue in my head in both directions - in Fantastic Beasts, which is going back, and in this play, which is going forwards. So I still had this material in my head."

Fascinating. So, this material. It was in *your* head. Hmm. Thanks for clearing that up for us!! Everyone catch that? I suppose it makes sense. Not as if you could simply close the book on Harry in your own mind, right?

"Just because I've stopped on the page doesn't mean my imagination stopped. It's like running a very long race. You can't just stop dead at the finishing line. I had some material and some ideas and themes, and we three [she nods at Tiffany and Thorne] made a story."

There we have it. Sorted. That really sets the stage for the posts to come. I have a lot of people counting on me, you know.

"Generally speaking, Harry Potter fans are a community, they have each other's backs..."

That we do, Miss Rowling. All thanks to you, dear. Anything else to add while I've got you? What did you think of 2016? Crazy, right?

"Such a wizardy year."

Totally. Cool cool.

All right...enough quotes

Peace out, homies.

Wait...there's more?

Yes, Mike. MISTER Cynicism.

This is from a one-on-one conversation between JKR and Dan Radcliffe from the DVD of Deathly Hallows Part 2.

Radcliffe: "Is there anything we've cut that you were upset about...anything we put in that wasn't in the book that you thought was great? Because I remember with Alfonso (the director of Prisoner of Azkaban) and the Dementors..."

Rowling: "No, I remember exactly what it was with Alfonso...there was something in the script. Alfonso really wanted to get music into the film. He put the choir in, which I loved. But at one point he had this bizarre scene where Flitwick was conducting and there were miniature people in an orchestra inside something. And I just, you see, this is my geekiness (Did you feel it a-quivering? ...sorry, I'll stop), I said to him, "But why?" I know it's visually exciting, but part of what fans enjoyed about the literary world is there was a logic that underpinned it. There was always logic to the magic no matter however strange it became. I know it's intriguing to go through the mouth of whatever it was and see these little people, but why? Why have they done it? For you to film it! That's just what it feels like. You know, normally with the magic there's a point. So we had a bit of a discussion about that."

Feeling a little bad now, aren't you, Mike? Seems like she DOES care about what the fans enjoyed and the logic in the production of her stories.

Hmm... It wasn't canon. Even if it would've looked cool, she wasn't okay with it... Hmm...

Fine, but if it was the case back then, why did she stop challenging the creative voices in the production team? Why not tell John Tiffany not to suggest plot details based on the spectacles he wanted to create onstage? What was it about the play that made JKR choose to surrender all continuity and logic to Thorne and Tiffany?

Good question, Me.

Thanks, Me. We'll get to that soon enough.