Kneazle (was Draco Redemption Evidence)

[heidi.h.tandy.c92 at alumni.upenn.edu]

No: HPFGUIDX 16317

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Haggridd" <jkusalavagemd at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer 
<pennylin at s...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Haggridd wrote:
> > > The suppositon that Crookshanks is a kneazle is another example 
of
> > > taking an unsupported assumption and building upon it.
> > 
> > :::clears throat:::  Kneazles are in the *canon* (the FB book). 
> Why 
> is
> > this assumption *unwarranted*?  It's at least as reasonable as 
any 
> other
> > assumptions one might make based solely on canon evidence.  Isn't 
> it?  I
> > don't get your point Hagridd.
> I take your point, Penny; it is a good one, but the mere existence 
of 
> a beast like the kneazle is not sufficient.  There should be some 
> textual "hook" upon which to hang your inspiration.  

Okay, fine,  you want a textual hook? You got it:
1. Kneazles are catlike creatures - FB p. 24
2. Kneazles have lion-like tails - FB p. 24. 
3. Crookshanks has a bottle brush tail - - PoA (don't have a page 
ref).
4. Kneazles can interbreed with cats - FB p. 25
5. Sirius says that Crookshanks is "the most intelligent of his kind 
I've ever met. He recognized Peter for what he was right away." PoA 
US 364 (of course, on the same page, he also calls him a cat, but 
this *may* be a hint that he's not a pure-cat but a mixed creature)
6. Crookshanks *hates* Scabbers/Peter and tries numerous times to 
bring the rat to Sirius, which *likely* indicates something more than 
wanting to capture the rat to eat it - it indicates a recognition 
that said rat is an unsavoury or suspicious character, which is a 
Kneazle ability. 

Is this enough of a hint that Crookshanks is part kneazle? I'm 
certainly not the only person to suggest this on the list - it's been 
mentioned in at least 30 posts since FB came out almost a month ago. 


> Why not then say 
> that Draco is the illegitimate son of Snape and Narcissa Malfoy. 
> Both persons are "in the canon"; Snape is a wizard, Narcissa is a 
> witch; Snape favors Draco, but there is nothing even to hint that 
it 
> might have happened.  
There is a very large difference between taking facts out of canon, 
which includes the two schoolbooks, and creating random matchings, 
although we love to do that in chats on sundays too, don't we? If you 
only want straight canon, then there's no point in discussing any of 
the nuances in JKR's choice of words in the books ever, is there? 
There's no joy in looking into the subtext if you can't make a 
logical conclusion therefrom.


> I am not attacking Heidi.  I thinks she engaged 
> in a very plausible and inspired bit of speculation; but the text 
> doesn't support it, even obliquely.  
Yes, it does. See above. 
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this, but a thorough 
reading of both FB & QTTA gives so many delightful tidbits of 
information about the four novels that it's hard to toss them into 
the slipstream.