Five skaters remain for the women's free dance.  Two Americans, a Russian who's never won gold, a South Korean often called "The Queen" for her dominance, and an Italian whose country has never won a medal before in the event.  The Russian takes a commanding lead, then come the Americans.  Both are smooth, elegant, and amazing to watch.  Yet both falter, and in an instant you know.  They won't medal.  The comes the South Korean.  She too skates wonderfully, spectacular even.  But is it enough?  Everyone waits on pins a needles.  The Russian watches back-stage to see the final score.  An eerie silence falls over the crowd.

It's not enough.  Silver for South Korea.  Italy holds on for bronze.

The roof blows as the home crowd celebrates the victory.  The Russian skater sprints through the halls to find her coaches and support team to do the same.

And I have a hard time not being happy for them.

Isn't that what sports should be?  What the Olypmics were created for?  Sure, we will cheer for, and hope for, success for our country.  But when they don't, can we not still take joy in a young woman who just won her first ever gold?  For the Italian, who just got the first medal ever in that event for her country?

Announcers often talk about the fraternity of sports.  When an NFL player suffers a serious injury, the players might as well have merged into one team while he's tended to.  Both sides will form a circle to pray for the injured man to be well.  So too in the Olympics, do we see so many with differing views cheering on others not of their nationality.

I can't help remembering a prime example of this back in December.  The final home game for the San Diego Chargers.  It was hard fought, physical, even controversial, but the Chargers beat the Kansas City Chiefs to sneak into the playoffs.  Then, as I'm in line for the bathroom afterward, I turn to a Chiefs fan, a bitter division rival.  I extend a hand and honestly say, "Good luck in Indy."  He takes it warmly, offers a friendly shake and smile.  "Good luck in Cincy."

For reference, by then we already knew that the Chiefs would go on to face the Indianapolis (Indy) Colts in the playoffs, while the Chargers would play the Cincinnati (Cincy) Bengals.

This is true sportsmanship, and what we see in the Olympics.  I promise you, not everyone cheering for the Russian, South Korean, or the Italian, were from any of those countries.  The applause after an impressive jump, or the groan after a painful fall, is not heard from only their countrymen.  All who watch that event are fans of the game, and share the highs and lows of it.  They won't cheer as loud as they would for their team, and that's fine.  It's even expected.  Yet they'll still give a standing ovation when a skater absolutely nails a routine.  They'll still offer a prayer when one doesn't get up after a fall.  I've even seen the athletes sharing in each other's success, or pain, during a competition.  On the ski slopes, you often find the leaders talking away between runs, even goofing off now and then like they were best buddies.

Their countries may not be allies.  They may even be at war.  But for one day, they share the joy of a sport they love, win lose or draw.  With any luck at all, they'll also part ways with a warm handshake and smile, and one will say, "Good luck next time."

And the other will respond, "You too."

WAIT!  This isn't about Harry Potter!

Well it is, but it's not really, just trust me.  It's the lead in to my topic, honest.

*WARNING: To anyone who hasn't read/seen the whole series yet (don't laugh, they exist) this does contain spoilers!*

By now we've all heard J.K. Rowling talk about how she feels Harry and Hermione should have been paired together instead of Hermione and Ron.  Since then, there's been a back-and-forth backlash about it.  Some feel she's right.  Others are crying foul for "messing with their childhood".  After all, that's how the story went.  Regardless of how we WANTED it to go, that's how things happened with-in the tale.  Yet it's amazing how instantly polarizing this whole thing is.  But I've got one better.  There are dozens of big name authors who would make similar admissions about their works.

Now Rowling talks about putting Hermione and Ron together because that was the original plan and she wanted to stick with it.  I'm unsure if that means she wanted to change that plan while writing it or not, but even if she did, it highlights something about writing I think gets lost sometimes.

The story has a life of it's own.  I've talked about this before.  Can we writers still make it go one way or another?  Of course.  Not always the best idea, but we can.  However, after it's all said and done, and the book is on the shelf, writers are always working.  I haven't met an author yet that hasn't mentioned he or she would have done something differently in one of their now published works.

This can lead to a lot of sleepless nights.  For the veteran, it might lead to thoughts about what would have been had they thought of that years ago.  For the novice, they try that much harder and wait that much longer to take the next step.  "What if I missed something?" they'll ask.  Fact is, they will.  They'll look back and think "wow, should have done that differently.

So where dose that leave the reader?  If they hear nothing about it, nothing changes.  But when they do, it makes them re-think it.  They see that world through the new perspective.  Personally I'm not sure why that's a bad thing.  In the case of Harry Potter, think on this; Maybe Hermione and Harry did have a thing for each other, but somewhere along the way, something happened and it just never got anywhere.  Perhaps Hermione secretly thought they'd end up together.  Or maybe Hermione took herself out of the running early because she didn't feel she could measure up to, or handle on a constant basis, the hype of "Harry Potter, the boy who lived."

I can already hear the out-cry.  The screams of how ridiculous those ideas are (that last one drawing an instant rebuttal from my mom), and I'm not sure I blame you.  The good books give us a world so real we feel we've lived -scratch that- are living in it.   But once the anger fades, why not let it build the world that much more?  Think about it.  You're there, in class with Ron, Harry, and Hermione.  You're traveling with them, facing the same dangers, and seeing the same signs.  What would you have done?  Would you have nudged Hermione and Harry together?  Would you have scoffed at the idea of her hooking up with Ron, only to be shocked when they announced their engagement?

Would you have done the same thing before you heard Rowling's admission?

That last one is the sticky one.  We writers are always second guessing ourselves and always will.  Perhaps we should keep our "woops, that's wrong" moments to ourselves for the sake of the reader.  Then again, perhaps it's best we share the mistakes we think we made so that we may share our real selves with the reader.

That's a hard line to walk, and I doubt many readers would be entirely sure which way they'd want it.