Prince of Lies/Talisman/Neville

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> 
wrote:
> I wrote: 
> > > 1.  I couldn't find Prince of Lies in the category list.  Is it 
> > there?  
> > 
> CW: Erm, no. Reason is that it wasn't on the acronym list. Been 
> > wondering whether to add it - does anyone have the post ref where 
it 
> > was first mentioned?
> 
> #34752.  

Carolyn: Ok, I have now added it to the Snape theories - 2.3.7.4.17

However, we now have a sub-problem. Post 34752 was rejected by 
Talisman on her most recent killing spree. Risking my life, I have 
now un-rejected it, and coded it to Prince of Lies. But there is a 
thread attached to it which has also been rejected, so, erm, Talisman 
do you want to revisit and resurrect any of 'em ??


> 
> I wrote:
> Except that the point is Harry and Neville as doubles (or mirror 
images) of one another.  There is no reference to any other lit.  Any 
ideas?

Carolyn: I would have thought clicking just Neville & Harry would be 
ok, but I could amend category 1.4.4 Generational parallels between 
characters, to read 'Generational and other parallels between 
characters' - would that do?

> 
> We should be having this debate on Main.  Stir up some interest in 
MD.  ;-) 

Carolyn: You are joking? The only acceptable subjects are Snape, the 
Dursleys and child abuse, surely you know that. Any poster attempting 
more complex thought patterns is immediately reported to Admin (and 
probably Donald Rumsfeld) as un-American. 


Debbie:
> Actually, I agree with most of this.  Everything except the notion 
that DD lied to Harry, as it's inconsistent with the rules of 
engagement -- that is, the rules of the engagement between JKR and 
her readers.  And the rule, as I see it, is that Dumbledore does not 
lie to those on his side.  He withholds information, yes, but he does 
not outright lie, especially when he's having those end-of-book tete-
a-tetes with Harry.  From PS/SS ch. 17:  "'I shall answer your 
questions unless I have a very good reason not to, in which case I 
beg you'll forgive me.  I shall not, of course, lie.'"

Carolyn:
Hm, some dancing on the head of pin going on here. Epitome's of 
goodness can lie, but not to their nearest and dearest, only to 
baddies ? Apart from being a fairly dubious moral distinction, what 
if it's in Harry's best interest for Dumbledore not to go into the 
fine print here? Frank Longbottom's side of the family probably is 
pure blood, why go into the fact that Alice's side might have a 
muggle somewhere along the line?

What if Neville's potential half blood status is part of one of those 
secret deep-laid plans, another barrier or protection for Harry that 
Voldemort doesn't know about, and may come in useful one day, like 
Pettigrew's life debt, and the shared Fawkes' feather wand cores?

And as for JKR's rules of engagement with her readers - frankly, 
after all the equivocation in the interviews, and 'mistakes' on the 
website, and deus ex machina plot solutions like Crouch!Moody, I 
think she can wriggle out of anything if necessary. I don't trust her 
an inch.

Carolyn

'It was a clue, sir' said Dobby, his eyes widening as though this was 
obvious. 'Dobby was giving you a clue. The Dark Lord, before he 
changed his name, could be freely named, you see?'
'Right', said Harry weakly.