Babbling newbie

[Brandgwen G.]

No: HPFGUIDX 5590

Kimberly wrote:
> -Also along those same lines I wanted to toss out my theory for 
the person who wondered why James' death didn't protect Lily the way 
Lily's death protected Harry.  I think maybe it's because James 
didn't die solely to protect them.  I don't know why V wanted to kill 
James, exactly, but I had inferred that it was because James had set 
himself against V and his cause in some substantial way.  In this 
light, James was dying as much for a cause (the 'resistance' for lack 
of a better term) as to protect his family.  

There has been a lot of speculation that Harry might be the heir of 
Gryffindor, which was why Voldemort was after him.  Regardless of 
which side of the family this came from, Voldemort would most likely 
have assumed it was James' (Muggle born Lily would be below his 
notice).  Thus, in Voldemort's eyes, both James and Harry would be a 
threat and, so, both would be the target.  Thus, James would have
died protecting himself as much as his family.  Lily, on the other 
hand, died purely for Harry.

>He may, in fact, have believed that Voldemort would not hurt his 
family, unless he knew what we don't, which is why originally V
wanted Harry dead.  

Dumbledore knows, he said so in the Philosopher's Stone.  Would he 
really have kept this from James?

Also, you'll remember when Harry goes to Ollivander's, Ollivander
tells him about his parent's wands.  He says James' was good for 
transfiguration (appropriate for an animagus), while Lily's was good 
for charm work, so Lily must have been good at charms.  It is
possible that her death, in itself, didn't cast the charm - she cast 
the charm and her death gave it power.

> My inner child is in love with Ron...

Mine, too.  She often has arguements with my trouble-maker, who is in 
love with George, and my inner werewolf, who is in love with Lupin.

> This said, I do have a question - one person mentioned that Ron was 
susceptible to the Imperius Curse.  I also recall that he was more 
influenced by the veela than Harry.  But at the same time he was not 
as susceptible to the mirror of Erised as Harry.   What do you think 
about that?  Seems interesting, but I don't know what it implies.

Generally, I think Ron is less focused than Harry.  This leaves him 
more vulnerable to suggestion and superficiallity.  It also means 
that, once these influences are removed, they are easier to forget. 
I think part of Ron's growing up might be finding that focus.  We'll
see exactly who and what have penetrated his minute attention span
and become important to him.

Okay, this is a small, ill defined bit of speculation.  I'll have to 
go over the books, again, to concrete it.  However, has anyone
noticed how every now and then, when Ron throws in his sarcastic 
little observations, he turns out to be right?  He guessed about 
Riddle killing Moaning Murtyl, he guessed about Crookshanks 
understanding speech (if he couldn't, how did he know what Neville's 
list of passwords was?) and, when he and Harry were making up stories 
for Devination in Goblet of Fire, they actually managed to predict 
their whole arguement.  No one pays much attention, not even Ron.  
He's joking, and is probably just as surprised as anyone when these 
things actually come to pass.  What's more, when he deliberately
tries to analyse things, he often gets it wrong.  However,
Trelawney's real prediction occurred when she wasn't trying to
predict anything.  She just let her concious mind go and the words 
came.  Maybe when Ron is taking himself least seriously, he is 
actually saying the most important things.  If this is true, an 
unfocused mind might be advantageous.  I'm probably wrong about this, 
but wouldn't it be wonderfully ironic if Ron, who considers his 
Devination homework a work of fiction, turned out to be a Seer?  
Wouldn't Hermione howl!

Okay, that's it,
Gwen.