From Whirdy at aol.com Sat Dec 1 00:04:32 2001 From: Whirdy at aol.com (Whirdy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:04:32 EST Subject: A Bloody Baron Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30487 Aside from Prof. Binns are the ghosts at Hogwarts members of the staff or faculty? They are noted as "house" ghosts, but are they mascots or former students? Are they tormented souls who are denied their final rest and doomed to haunt the halls of Hogwarts? How does one become a ghost? Binns simply got up and left his body behind - is that a new definition of death a la Dumbledore? Why is Peeves (and what is his status) terrified of the Bloody Baron? whirdy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tifosi_babe at hotmail.com Sat Dec 1 00:09:17 2001 From: tifosi_babe at hotmail.com (Claire Sutton) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 00:09:17 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagi/ McGonagall Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30488 >From: "Hollydaze" . >So what does a cat (McGonagall) represent? I feel that this could be a >big >clue to McGonagall, especially relating to the discussion from the >weekend >that she may be evil. I just can't see a cat as evil or sneaky >etc but I >can't think (remember) what cat's represent. >Does anyone know what cats are supposed to be? My only suggestion as to what being a cat represents is that in History cats have been both revered and feared. they were considered among the most intelligent and mystical animals but also were associated with evil. I would prefer to believe that she is represented by a cat because of magical ability (the Egyptian view of cats) rather than because of the medieval suggestion that cats were evil demon like creatures. Here is some information I managed to quickly get my hands on that might help is work out why McGonagall is a cat. "The common cat has a long history. For thousands of years, the domestic cat has aroused strong emotions in its human companions. Cats have been considered magical creatures, well acquainted with both the world of man and the world of spirits. Extensive feline mythology stretches from ancient Egypt, where the cat was worshipped as a god and, where to kill a cat was to be punished by death." "to 16th century England, when it was demoted to the rank of demon and was savagely persecuted by the Christian Church, because of its association with witchcraft and black magic. " (info taken from http://webhome.idirect.com/~ladyjade/) Claire (Hoping desperately not to get her second post to the list as wrong as her first) _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com Sat Dec 1 00:24:54 2001 From: Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com (Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:24:54 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Red V. Green Message-ID: <9c.172df567.29397d56@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30489 I don't know if it would have any hidden message to it-but I did notice another Red V. Green example in GoF. Dobby gives Harry a green sock with a pattern of golden snitches and a red sock with a pattern of broomsticks ^-^ ~Cassie~ From Calypso8604 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 00:44:34 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:44:34 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Bloody Baron Question Message-ID: <14a.4efe35f.293981f2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30490 In a message dated 11/30/2001 7:30:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes: > Aside from Prof. Binns are the ghosts at Hogwarts members of the staff or > faculty? They are noted as "house" ghosts, but are they mascots or former > students? Are they tormented souls who are denied their final rest and > doomed to haunt the halls of Hogwarts? > > Why is Peeves (and what is his status) terrified of the Bloody Baron? Prof. Binns is said to be the only ghosts that *teaches* but at the beginning of SS/PS there's a part about 'twenty or so ghosts..' while the students are waiting in the front hall. So far we only know of 7 ghosts (Nick, Fat Friar, Grey Lady, Baron, Myrtle, Peeves, Binns) The Fat Friar says in SS/PS "Hope to see you in Hufflepuff! My old house you know...". The ghosts are former students at least....My theory is that they were all Professors and died at Hogwarts, which is why their ghosts stay there. Peeves must know something that we don't about the Baron. Such as how he got covered in blood. Something else that always struck me about the House ghosts is that we only know the actual *name* of one...Nick. The rest have titles of sorts.. - Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Calypso8604 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 00:49:58 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 19:49:58 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] McGonagall/Cats Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30491 In a message dated 11/30/2001 7:30:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes: > Does anyone know what cats are supposed to be? The first thing that crossed my mind about cats is their attitude. They are very smart creatures, somewhat aloof, and demand respect. Another thing that I know of cats is their importance to Egyptian culture and history. Cats are highly respected and were thought to be gods. The next parallel would be the Cat/Witch cliche. We all know that the witches in HP are not the stereotyped witches we know of. McGonagall turns into a tabby rather than the cliched black cat. There is also the Salem Hysteria thoughts of cats being Wiccans in a transformed state. I know that belief must go back further than the year of the witch trials but I remember reading about quite a bit of this when I was researching for an essay. - Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From res0icpa at verizon.net Sat Dec 1 01:15:23 2001 From: res0icpa at verizon.net (Heather Glude) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 17:15:23 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagi (was: Animagus vs. Transfigured) In-Reply-To: <9u93cu+hg9k@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30492 On Friday, November 30, 2001, at 03:06 PM, Cindy C. wrote: > things. Choice must play a role (contrary to what I said last week > ) because Krum apparently chooses shark (not crab or guppie), Note, however, that the books refer to Krum as having 'transfigured' into a half-shark. I am of the school of thought that animal transfiguration is different from becoming an animagus. If they were the same, then not being able to choose the animal you become just doesn't make sense. It shouldn't have anything to do with your personality. Personality doesn't play a role in any other kind of transfiguring. Moody chose to turn Malfoy into a ferret. Even if Malfoy is rather weasel-y, I don't think that had anything to do with that transformation. When one transfigures into an animal, significant mental faculty is lost. Even as an animagus, there's indication that the mind becomes simpler. Sirius says he's simpler as a dog. Perhaps personal transfiguration isn't popular because one has difficulty actually doing anything once achieving it, and in reversing it. Being an animagus, however, allows them to act more-or-less human. That would explain why only animagi have to register. This would be why Krum could choose an animal, and an animagus cannot. Heather From wartfan2001 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Dec 1 01:19:47 2001 From: wartfan2001 at yahoo.co.uk (wartfan2001 at yahoo.co.uk) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 01:19:47 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew as powerful underrated wizard? In-Reply-To: <4411680846.20011130140212@rogershsa.com> Message-ID: <9u9b7j+t96s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30493 I'm another lurker who's just decided to post - the thing is that there's such a lot of good stuff to read through that you don't really need to post most of the time. Anyway - I think Pettigrew was cleverer than people have given him credit for. He was obviously not very naturally talented, but hanging round with friends like James and Sirius obviously helped him get along. But I feel that he may have deliberately exagerrated his weakness and helplessnes in order to work more effectively for Voldermort. After all, not even Lupin suspected him until the end of PoA. Looking at the facts, Pettigrew managed to outsmart Sirius, and kill several muggles into the bargain, whilst managing to escape. And in book four, he manages to talk his way out of a tricky situation with Bertha Jorkins. And most importantly, he managed to find Voldermort, when characters such as the Lestrangers had to torture other people to find that information.The trouble is of course is that the only real time we get to view him as a character, he is first pleading for his life with Sirius and Lupin, and then crawling round Voldermort. But there are probably many many other good competent wizards, who faced with the same situations, would probably have behaved similarly -ie. whining for their life to be spared, and being scared by the great Voldermort. The point I'm trying to make is that Pettigrew is clever in playing up to a reputation he earnt at school, when really, he is most effective wizard who can transform into a rat at will, knows the dark curses, is strong enough to use them, and was able to defeat a powerful wizard in Sirius Black. I think Pettigrew will play a big roles in book five, and most likely, beyond. Thanks for trying to understand all that Mike From caliburncy at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 01:25:25 2001 From: caliburncy at yahoo.com (caliburncy at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 01:25:25 -0000 Subject: L.O.O.N.: Green and Red -- Harry's blood status -- Animagi -- Evil female Message-ID: <9u9bi5+o4f4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30494 Hello all, I have several L.O.O.N. (League of Obsessive Nitpickers) notices that require distribution. Pleas bear with me and pretend to look enthralled. No, no, I want more feeling than that! C'mon! Punch it up a little! Where's the enthusiasm? Show me tantalization! I want edge-of-your-seats, noses-squashed-flat- against-the-monitor thrill! Make me BELIEVE! Umm, yes . . . where was I? Oh, yes, L.O.O.N. notices. Right. *** First, credit where it's due: --- In HPforGrownups at y..., John Walton wrote: > Someone (I think it was Luke) did an excellent analysis of the > Colour Green way back in the archives. Sadly, this was not me--though I wish it was, because it's a very impressive list. It was Ben Jones (buedefixe at netzero.com) and I highly recommend that all of those persons whom are currently green- spotting or red-spotting check it out, because it probably already includes whatever you've found: Message #23407 has all the instances of green (at the bottom) Message #23435 has all the instances of red (also at the bottom) So rather than reinventing the wheel, this will save us some effort, and we can focus instead on adding any instances he may have missed. Or, even better, speculating on the pattern that appears to have developed and what significance it may hold. *** Second, Harry's blood status: I've never fully understood why this seems to be a source of so much confusion--though I have noticed that there are some HP fandom sites (not the Lexicon) that misrepresent this information, so perhaps that's why. As Penny and Philip Nel have pointed out, canon indicates very strongly that Harry is considered a half-blood by whatever standard the Wizarding World uses. I would not be repeating this except for the fact that some people seem to still be confused, so I think we should bring out the relevant canon quotes: COS, Chap. 17, The Heir of Slytherin [Tom Riddle to Harry] "There are strange likenesses between us, after all. Even you must have noticed. Both half-bloods[...]" Joshua Dyal points out that this comment may not be totally reliable, what with the future Lord Voldemort being the bastion of truth that he is. (After all, cold-blooded murder is one thing, but a fib or over-generalization? No, that's certainly where The Dark Lord draws the line.) There is a certain logic to this, because we do have precedent in the Potterverse for statements that are false going unchecked in canon. For example, JKR confirmed in an AOL chat that when Riddle said Hagrid was raising werewolf cubs under the bed, this was a lie--pure slander. But we also have: GOF, Chap. 24, Rita Skeeter's Scoop [Hagrid to Harry] "I'd love yeh ter win, I really would. It'd show 'em all . . . yeh don' have teh be pureblood ter do it." So unless Hagrid is also either lying or somehow misunderstands the criteria for 'blood status' (both of which seem highly unlikely), then we know Harry is not concerned a pureblood just because both of his parents are wizards. And this then gives additional creedence to Tom Riddle's statement in COS. Since there is no conflicting evidence and one piece of consistent (though not strictly corroboratory) evidence, I recommend we take Riddle's statement at face value and assume Harry is a half-blood. We can then assume that the criteria for half-blood status is not based on immediate parentage, but overall genealogy (as seems logical, IMHO). Exactly what standard the Wizarding World uses (one- drop, four/eight generations, etc.) is unknown and perhaps not consistent. *** --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > [A post discussing possible factors in animagus form] > Choice must play a role (contrary to what I said last week > ) because Krum apparently chooses shark (not crab or guppie), > which he needs to be in the second task. While choice may play a role in the determination of animagus form (although the chat comments from JKR indicate otherwise), Krum's transformation into a shark is not an example of this. Krum-as-shark is an example of (human-to-)animal transfiguration, not the animagus spell specifically--the difference being that animal transfiguration is a one-time-only deal that must be recast each time a transfiguration is desired, whereas the animagus form is a permanent affectation that can be assumed either at will or perhaps with a simple magical catalyst (wand, incantation, etc.) after the initial spell has been cast. There are other apparent differences between animal transfiguration and the animagus form that have been debated on list, mostly using evidence from FBAWTFT, I believe. Choice is clearly a factor in animal transfiguration, but probably is not for the animagus form based on what JKR has said. *** Regarding the Evil Female Character and the Excised Character in GOF: --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Jenny Downs" wrote: > I read a JKR interview a few months ago and she was asked about the > evil female character. Apparently she was originally in GoF but JKR > had to cut her out for some reason-maybe it had some thing to do > with the gaping hole she discovered in the plot, or maybe the evil > female made the book too long... Are you certain these are one and the same? I have seen interviews in which JKR has discussed the character she had to take out from GOF (it was a Weasley cousin, BTW), but I don't remember any implications that this was also the evil female character JKR had previously referred to. Do you think you could seek out a link? Because if I have missed an article then I would love to see it! It's quite possible, I suppose, since part of the role of the Weasley cousin plot-wise was apparently subsumed into the (previously existing, but then expanded) role of Rita Skeeter, who many consider to be the evil female character to whom JKR referred. Equally likely, of course, is the Death Eater woman shown on trial in the Pensieve that many members guess is Mrs. Lestrange. -Luke From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 1 01:32:25 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 01:32:25 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew as Auror? In-Reply-To: <4411680846.20011130140212@rogershsa.com> Message-ID: <9u9bv9+h9lk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30495 Jason wrote: > In reference to Cindy suggesting that Wormtail had been an Auror, I'd > have to laugh. He is constantly being referred to as hopeless, > untalented and weak....not necessarily the skills you are looking for > in an Auror are they. Normally, I write Peter off as a talentless, hopeless case. Voldemort says it. McGonagall says it. Sirius says it. So it must be true, right? But maybe there is more to Peter than meets the eye. Voldemort doesn't seem the type to give lots of positive reinforcement, so his assessment doesn't count for much. As for Sirius, I adore him, but he certainly is an arrogant thing, isn't he? Lupin confirms this when he tells of MWPP's adventures, in which he says they were carried away with their own cleverness. Sirius decides that changing the secret-keeper is a good plan, and doesn't feel the need to clear it with Dumbledore or even tell Dumbledore after the fact. Sirius was probably overconfident that he could defeat Pettigrew in a duel. So when Sirius says Peter was "talentless," (and says it in the middle of a towering rage in the Shrieking Shack), maybe I have to discount it a bit. As for McGonagall, she first calls Pettigrew a "fat little boy" who tagged around with James and Sirius. Then she says Peter was "never quite in their league, talentwise. I was often rather sharp with him." She says this having no idea that Peter managed the animagus transformation, BTW. Assuming McGonagall's assessment is correct, it only means Peter didn't measure up to the two most clever students in the school. Peter might easily be one of those people who does not do well in school, but does very well in the real world. To Peter's credit, we know he can perform Avada Kedavra, can brew a potion to restore Voldemort, can outsmart Sirius when it counts, is tough enough to amputate his own hand, and managed to guilt Harry into sparing his life. Not bad for a talentless, hopeless case. Cindy (who can't understand how she got backed into Peter's corner) From liquidfire at mindgate.net Sat Dec 1 00:32:18 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 08:32:18 +0800 Subject: Defeating Voldemort, Black as Auror, evil female character, color wars, MORE Ravenclaw In-Reply-To: <11.1e8f1f32.29392806@aol.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011201083218.00799d40@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30496 Whirdy wrote: > Why must > it be a given or expected that death is the only solution and an unnatural > one at that? > > We know that certain of Voldemort's talents have been transferred to Harry > and according to Gof F (IIRC) part of Harry goes the other way, what better > way for good to defeat evil. Because the way the books are going, it really seems that LV's demise is the direction the series is going to take (the question now is 'How?'). But you're right, there are many ways to do away with LV without having to kill him. Besides, I don't think he can be killed anyway, not in the usual sense, at least. Bree wrote: >I was under the impression that Sirius Black WAS an Auror, so the MoM >would have had to send specially trained "hit wizards" (the Green >Berets or Seals of the Aurors?) to capture one of their own. >This may also explain why Sirius wasn't killed on sight. As an Auror, >his co-workers might have wanted to give him the chance of a trial, >especially since he proclaimed his innocence. Maybe the MoM just 'overreacted', so to speak. Black did kill 13 people with a certain curse. Black wasn't given a trial. He tells Harry so in GoF when thwey meet in the mountains near Hogsmeade. Barty Crouch Sr saw to that. And as far as I know, there are no references indicating that Black might have been an Auror. But he most probably is a member of the 'old crowd' (Order of the Pheonix), as there is reference to this in GoB. Christine wrote: >Salon.com's 7/6/00 article discussing the 4th Potter book states "Rowling has said that >she will introduce the first really evil female character; " in book 4. Did anyone >notice an evil female character? I'm racking my brain and I cannot think of any. Or >was someone's true colors shown? This is a stretch, but remember the pensieve chapter? The last trial, the one with Barty Jr? There was a female in that group (Mrs. Lestrange?) who spoke out as they were being led away. Does that count? I personally don't think so, but that's all I know... Lily Solstar wrote: >I've noticed some interesting color wars throughout the books, >particularly with the color red verses the color green. I'm inclined to think that was merely a literary device JK Rowling was using to define 'good' and 'bad', and nothing more. Still, in HP, we never know. Joshua Dyal wrote: >Hermione seems that way on the surface because we don't really know >any Ravenclaws (how come the Gryffindors have classes with the >Hufflepuffs and Slytherins so often, but not the Ravenclaws?) We DO know at least one Ravenclaw: Cho Chang. Two, if you count the so-dashingly named Roger Davies. But you have a point; I want to see more Ravenclaws! From oppen at cnsinternet.com Sat Dec 1 02:46:50 2001 From: oppen at cnsinternet.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 20:46:50 -0600 Subject: Percy Weasley and his ambitions Message-ID: <012001c17a12$6eb76fc0$c6c71bce@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 30497 One thing to keep in mind about Percy W. is that ambition is not an exclusive property of Slytherins---and that probably almost everybody at Hogwarts would fit into more than one House. The Sorting Hat can see all of your personality (cue pic from most recent _MAD_ magazine...Sorting Hat on Alfred E. Neuman's head, visualizing a toilet) but can only put you into _one_ house. I wrote once at some considerable length (in a fic) about how Hermione would have fit very well into all the Houses. She has great bravery, of course, which is what made her a Gryffindor...but she's as book-smart as any of the Ravenclaws, has work-ethic enough to make most of the Hufflepuffs look like lazy louts, and has ambition enough (to be the BEST witch she can be) to make the Slytherins we've met look rather lackadasial and laid-back. Remember how the Hat told Harry that he'd do well in Slytherin? Harry is, to us, the archetypical Gryffindor, and we see Gryffindor and Slytherin as total, Manichaean opposites, but Harry would, according to an acknowledged expert, have thrived in Slytherin. I'd imagine that within Gryffindor House, there are quite a few people who are _not_ totally Brave. Percy might have been a rather Slytherin-ish Gryffindor...brave, but with a burning ambition to better himself. Hermione is a very Ravenclaw-ish Gryffindor. Neville Longbottom strikes me as a rather Hufflepuff-ish Gryffindor. Similarly, within Slytherin House, you could have people who share a lot of characteristics with other Houses...a Slytherin who is, admittedly, ambitious, but who sees sheer hard work as the way to succeed, and so works very hard, a Slytherin who is ambitious but also regularly faces fear and overcomes it, or a Slytherin who is ambitious---to be the wizard that makes new discoveries in the world of magic, and who hits the books day and night, trying to soak up all the knowledge he or she can. I would bet that there were Death Eaters from all the houses, as well...otherwise investigation would have been much easier; just go after all the Slytherin alumni and investigate them. (I can see a wizarding version of Senator Joe McCarthy yelling "Are you now, or have you ever been...a SLYTHERIN?") Comments? Flames? Anything? From devika at sas.upenn.edu Sat Dec 1 06:06:31 2001 From: devika at sas.upenn.edu (Devika S. Lal) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 01:06:31 -0500 Subject: Peter's talents (was Pettigrew as Auror?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30498 Cindy wrote: <<>> Absolutely. Sirius sees him as a talentless coward, but he's certainly not talentless. He may not be the most powerful wizard there is, but he has skills nonetheless. As for being a coward, I think that his actions are motivated by cowardice, but the actions themselves take some courage. After all, he was a spy for Voldemort. Many people talk about how brave Snape must have been to be a spy for Dumbledore. Peter must have had some courage to be Voldemort's spy. Peter also amputated first his finger, then later his whole right hand. I doubt that a coward would be able to do that. However, I think that Peter joined Voldemort out of fear. And then when the time came for him to face the consequences of his betrayal, he wasn't brave enough to handle it. I realize that he was facing death, but I can't see someone like Harry or Sirius or Lupin pleading for his life in a situation like that. Overall, I think Peter is a coward, not because the things he does are cowardly, but because his actions are motivated by nothing more than fear. If he had betrayed the Potters or even joined Voldemort to fulfill his own agenda (like I suspect Lucius Malfoy did), then I would consider him to be a terrible person still, but not a coward. Instead, however, Peter seems to have joined Voldemort simply because he was afraid to stand up to him. His fear was stronger than his loyalty to his friends, whose loyalty to him was so strong that they would have died for him. That makes him a coward. So Sirius was right on one count, anyway. Talentless, no. Coward, yes. <<>> Perhaps Sirius was a bit arrogant. He had been used to feeling superior to Peter in school, and that probably continued after they had left Hogwarts. He was used to underestimating Peter's powers because they weren't as great as his own had been in school. Also, I believe that Sirius sorely underestimated the power of a desperate man. At the time of their "duel," Peter had absolutely nothing to lose. His betrayal was revealed, his master was gone, and the remaining DEs thought he had betrayed them as well. Sirius was in such a state of shock (he had just seen the dead bodies of two of his closest friends) that he wasn't thinking clearly and wasn't exactly on top of his game. I doubt that Sirius went looking for Peter thinking that he would be fighting a duel with him. He couldn't have been prepared for what was going to happen. Sirius probably thought (if he thought about it at all, which is unlikely) that he would find Peter, confront him, and curse (kill?) him for what he had done. End of story. Sirius underestimated Peter's desperation. He probably never suspected that Peter would kill a street full of innocent Muggles and frame him for it. No wonder Sirius was laughing hysterically when the MOM wizards found him. How utterly absurd the situation must have been for him. About the duel, though. Was it actually a duel? I mean, Peter's curse wasn't directed at Sirius--it must have been directed close to *himself*. Peter had to make it look like Sirius had blown him up along with the street and the bystanders. Sure, it *looked* like a duel (McGonagall thought so), but to me it just seems like a single curse. (Did that make any sense?) I guess I'm just trying to defend Sirius (of course,) by saying that under normal circumstances, Peter wouldn't have had any chance against him. <<>> I see Peter as possessing rather average skills. With a little training from Voldemort, he would have been able to perform some advanced magic. As for Harry saving his life, I don't think that had much to do with Peter's pleading. I think Harry just was thinking more rationally than either Sirius or Remus, and he realized that Peter was not worth turning the two of them into murderers. <<>> You're right, it's not bad at all. Peter certainly exceeded people's expectations of him, ironic and tragic as that may be. <<>> Acknowledging Peter's abilities doesn't make him a better person. If anything, IMO, it makes his actions all the more reprehensible. He had the abilities to choose what was right, but he didn't do it. Devika From catlady at wicca.net Sat Dec 1 10:50:40 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 10:50:40 -0000 Subject: gadgets/Accountant/Eyeglasses/Fake Dementor/Fletcher/Cats/Mudbloods Message-ID: <9uacm0+j01l@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30499 Gwen/Lee wrote: > I have often wondered about Dumbledore's seeming fondness for > gadgets. The Put-outer, the watch with planets, the mirror, the > Philosopher's Stone, the Pensieve--is there a pattern here? I dunno that the Stone and the Mirror are gadgets, but CoS describes Dumbledore's office as "a large and beautiful circular room, full of funny little noises. A number of curious silver instruments stood on spindlelegged tables, whirring and emitting little puffs of smoke." Instruments = Gadgets. Megan wrote: > I think Ron's statement about his "2nd cousin accountant" is quite > interesting myself, this forming the assumption that there are no > wizard accountants (why not?) Might the accounting be done by House Elves, just among their many tasks? Or wizard folk take their shoe boxes of crumpled receipts to Muggle accountants -- accountancy being what Muggles contribute to wizards! > & the fact that Ron uses that title to associate his cousin's job > as being extremely Muggle-like.(snip) Did Ron mean that this > accountant was a Squib (so why didn't he just say THAT)? I don't > know if a Muggle can just pop up somewhere across the lines. Maybe the accountant is a relative by marriage, a Muggle who married a witch or wizard who is Arthur or Molly's first cousin once removed. Actually second cousin is a close enough relative (the offspring of your parent's first cousin) that I would expect the wizarding folk to know them. JC fordpr wrote: > One would also think that magic could cure near-sightedness yet > there's lots of characters who still wear glasses... That's what I kept saying, until someone suggested that the eyeglasses aren't really for myopia but have deep magical purposes and that all the characters with eyeglasses are Gryffindors. I haven't checked on the latter statement. I also think that magic also ought to be able to cure obesity and baldness, but the books are full of dumpy and/or balding characters. Sarahbeth wrote: > [Tita Cats's] post just smacked this fellow lurker in the head with > a strange and unlikely, but still interesting theory. What if the > Dementor that Fudge brought with him was just some tall skinny guy >(DE) in a big spooky cloak? What if it was all part of the "just in > case Potter returns alive" backup plan? Well, that would explain how Fudge could hang out with a Dementor without getting depressed. Hollydaze! wrote about Animagi: > So what does a cat (McGonagall) represent? Curiosity. No, seriously, cats resemble McGonagall in many ways: very careful of their dignity, they pretend to be arrogant and aloof. They have sharp claws and teeth that they use very effectively for fighting and self-defense, but they very often avoid fighting by being cautious, scoping out situations before they enter and so on (I hesitate to accuse McGonagall of running up a tree to escape from You-Know-You!). But they're secretly big softies who dote on their humans and other friends. And they are very sensual indeed when private and relaxed -- I am sure McGonagall totally enjoys a hot bubblebath in her private quarters! Joshua wrote > Mundungus Fletcher (presumably the father of the poor Hufflepuff > Fletcher girl that seems to get in so much trouble What Hufflepuff Fletcher girl? Are you thinking of the Fawcett girl or girls (one Hufflepuff one Ravenclaw), presumably offspring of the Fawcetts who couldn't get tickets to the World Cup in GoF? Eileen wrote: > Hermione marries Ron. :) Their children would probably be called > half-bloods. One of these marries someone from the same situation, > and so on, so that the actual ammount of Muggle blood keeps > constant but for 5 generations back the family is completely > wizard. What is this person? I mean, in Lucius Malfoy's eyes? How > long can he keep up his prejudices? CoS: "It was a very near miss," said Ernie. "And in case you're getting ideas," he added hastily, "I might tell you that you can trace my family back through nine generations of witches and warlocks and my blood's as pure as anyone's, so -" It's not my original idea, someone else suggested it, but Ernie's mention of 'nine generations of witches and warlocks' suggests that nine generations is the definition of a Pureblood. I wonder if nine generations of long wizarding lifespans could take his records back to the time when the Founders were still running Hogwarts? (And thank you for noticing that the offspring of a Pureblood and a Mudblood is a Halfblood, altho' we haven't heard whether they have words for fine distinctions like quadroon, octaroon, and bien-passe.) Joshua wrote: > Yes, but Riddle also calls his mother a Muggle, which isn't true. > I believe that is hyperbole on Riddle's part more than anything. Riddle called the late Lily a Muggle the same way that Draco called Hermione a Muggle when he found our three hiding in the woods from the DE riot at the World Cup. To the villains, a Mudblood IS a Muggle. Philip Nel wrote: > That is, why does Rowling have certain characters care about > magical parentage, when other characters do not care in the least? > What assumptions lie behind this concern over purebloods, > half-bloods and "mudbloods"? You must be the author of that book I just ordered from Amazon based entirely on Penny's recommendation on this list! The bad guys care about pedigrees and the good guys don't. I suppose that, rather than being a handy way to tell the good guys from the bad guys (I don't think Ernie Macmillan is a bad guy despite the quote above), it's a mildly preachy way of condemning both racism and the class system (both based on pedigrees). The Death Eaters have an obvious resemblance to Nazis and NeoNazis (including following their charismatic leader), and also an obvious resemblance to the Ku Klux Klan (someone on list pointed out how similar the costumes are). The prejudice is not bound into law like Jim Crow laws, the Death Eater organization was not invented by leading members of the government to enforce customs generally accepted as laws, and the wizarding racists show no sign of wanting to keep the Muggleborn around as cheap and subservient labor. They just want to eliminate (kill) the Muggleborn. Why? I can't accept that bigotry and intolerance and genocide are the automatic result of differences between peoples. The Greeks may have said rude things about the Scythians being 'barbarians', but the two peoples did business with each other and influenced each other's art and legends and I don't recall any genocides. Supposedly the wizarding folk are just like Muggles except they have this one extra ability (magic) and live significantly longer (I figure twice as long). I can see people who can do something easily and naturally feeling superior to people who can't do it at all, thus the patronizing attitude toward Muggles that we see even from good guys like Arthur Weasley. But it is not a direct step from patronizing to genocide, and feeling superior to people who can't Accio or Levitate is irrelevant about Muggleborn witches and wizards -- they CAN do magic. Even tho' the wizarding folk think of themselves as kind of an upper class, a certain snobbery about nouveaux riches or other kinds of people who have risen into the upper class generally does not cause genocide. I am convinced that the hatred that people like Lucius Malfoy feel toward Muggles and the Muggleborn comes from their fear of Muggles, and the accompanying scorn is a defense mechanism, an exceeding ungraceful one. They proudly trace their opinions back to Salazar Slytherin, and here is what History (in the form of Professor Binns) says about Salazar and the Muggleborn in CoS: "You all know, of course, that Hogwarts was founded over a thousand years ago - the precise date is uncertain - by the four greatest witches and wizards of the age. The four school Houses are named after them: Godric Gryffindor, Helga Hufflepuff, Rowena Ravenclaw, and Salazar Slytherin. They built this castle together, far from prying Muggle eyes, for it was an age when magic was feared by common people, and witches and wizards suffered much persecution." He paused, gazed blearily around the room, and continued. "For a few years, the founders worked in harmony together, seeking out youngsters who showed signs of magic and bringing them to the castle to be educated. But then disagreements sprang up between them. A rift began to grow between Slytherin and the others. Slytherin wished to be more selective about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy. After a while, there was a serious argument on the subject between Slytherin and Gryffindor, and Slytherin left the school." IMPORTANT CLUES: "far from prying Muggle eyes, for it was an age when magic was feared by common people, and witches and wizards suffered much persecution." and "He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy." They were HIDING because they were AFRAID of being persecuted by Muggles (there are a bunch of references to hiding from Muggle persecution in Quidditch Through the Ages, too) and Salazar's objection to Muggleborn students was that they might pass information about the wizarding folk to their dangerous Muggle relatives. Fear. Which might even explain why even Malfoy and Riddle show no sign of wanting to exterminate Halfbloods and don't even use the word Halfblood as a serious insult (Riddle uses it of himself): there was no point in excluding students raised by one magical parent, as they ALREADY KNEW about the wizarding world. That's a big difference from the two models of villainy I mentioned earlier, the one where "one drop" of black "blood" made a person black, and the one where one Jewish great-grandparent made a person Jewish. From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sat Dec 1 11:27:45 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (dfrankiswork at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 06:27:45 -0500 Subject: Killing Black, Canon onion, scar, Gryffindor heir, Cars, Dark Mark Message-ID: <6FF9CD1C.56B15A0D.6E93A4F5@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30500 Can you tell I've been catching up? Cindy, Krolik, Milz and others wondered how Harry would have killed Black. Gwendolyn Grace said about 90% of what I wanted to say; I just want to add that by this time Harry is used to using a wand, and unconsciously or intuitively knows that whatever he wants to achieve will be amplified - so he goes for his wand. Also Harry has 12 years' worth of anger built up for reasons that at that time he directly attributes to Sirius. I believe that if Crookshanks hadn't intervened, there would have been some pretty spectacular fireworks. After all, someone must have originally invented AK in this sort of way. Mike the Goat produced a lovely onion! Just one small comment: I believe that the US editions are not just translations. For example, I understand the statement that Dean is black, which is in the US but not the UK editions of PS (Sorting Hat), is something approved by JKR, even if originally invented by Scholastic. I think that would put them between the press releases and the school books in the layering. MacGyverMagic speculated that the final sentence ending in 'scar' would concern a scar of Dumbledore's. I wrote off to Sybill Trelawney, and when I saw her answer, decided to write this instead: "Harry stepped out of the Leaky Cauldron and made his way to Oxford Circus tube station. Fortunately, finding his way back to Paddington would be quite easy, as he had memorised Dumbledore's scar." Several people speculated that Lily Evans was a descendent of Gryffindor. I have no real view on this theory (except to note that JKR is generally anti the significance of physical descent), but it does raise an interesting possibility in a future book: "The door burst open, and a huge figure was framed against the sudden glare. It knocked Pettigrew to the ground with a single blow, saying 'They thought they could conquer me, Dudley Dursley, in whose veins runs the blood of Godric Gryffindor himself.'" Uma Heather says Arthur Weasley can requisition Ministry cars for personal use; he can't: the one time they use them (at the beginning of POA), Percy specifically expresses surprise. The real reason, of course, is that Fudge wants to ensure Harry's protection from Black. Gabriel Edson asked, about the Dark Mark: Why would you want a tattoo that says "bad guy?" Ah, but they think they're the *good* guys, rescuing wizards from the Muggle-loving fools and Mudbloods. And it's apparent that Voldemort values risky expressions of loyalty highly: confessing him before the heathen is part of his quasi-religious setup. David, now trying to get the picture of Quirrell lying back in the bath out of his head -- __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop at Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/ From psammeaddd at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 08:24:53 2001 From: psammeaddd at yahoo.com (psammeaddd at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 08:24:53 -0000 Subject: A Bloody Baron Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ua44l+5rdi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30501 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Whirdy at a... wrote: > Aside from Prof. Binns are the ghosts at Hogwarts members of the staff or > faculty? They are noted as "house" ghosts, but are they mascots or former > students? Are they tormented souls who are denied their final rest and > doomed to haunt the halls of Hogwarts? > > How does one become a ghost? Binns simply got up and left his body behind - > is that a new definition of death a la Dumbledore? In the standard mythology, people seem to become ghosts when they died violent deaths (like Nearly Headless Nick, Moaning Myrtle and, from his name, probably the Bloody Baron as well), or when they had unfinished business to take care of. (I'd hate to think something like having a class to teach the next morning, a la Binns, would count as enough unfinished business to turn a person into a ghost for all eternity!) > Why is Peeves (and what is his status) terrified of the Bloody Baron? > Dunno - maybe he was responsible for the Bloody Baron's demise! Also, as Peeves is a poltergeist, maybe he's different from the others. I'm pretty sure a poltergeist is just another kind of ghost (I think it translates to "noisy ghost"), but is it supposed to be a spirit that never was human, or do human troublemakers turn into poltergeists when they die? > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heidi.h.tandy.c92 at alumni.upenn.edu Sat Dec 1 13:19:04 2001 From: heidi.h.tandy.c92 at alumni.upenn.edu (Tandy, Heidi) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 08:19:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: wizarding generations Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30502 Rita asked whether 9 generations would take us back to when the founders founded Hogwarts, in the context of determining pure blood. The answer is that Wizarding generations are likely 25 years each, same as Muggle ones are counted, because witches seem to get pregnant at vaguely the same ages as their Muggle counterparts, although we don't know if they can be in their late 40's and older and still get pregnant easily without medical intervention. Generations aren't based on lifespans, and thus it's likely that nine generations doesn't go back further than the reign of George the Third, well after the wizarding world went into hiding. Heidi Tandy Http://www.FictionAlley.org. - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes and ships - 7 sickles an ounce. From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 14:08:10 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:08:10 -0000 Subject: replies to Quidditch and house points; Snape's loyalties In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20011201015818.007ac180@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <9uao8a+vao0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30503 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Liquidfire wrote: > Heather wrote: > I think Snape really doesn't like Harry, but is honor-bound to protect him > anyway. Slytherin? It's his house, after all. Malfoy? Now this is quite > tricky. Yes, it's apparent that Snape likes Malfoy, there's even a textual > reference to it (PoA?). But shouldn't Snape worry about Lucius Malfoy? > After all, Snape has betrayed LV, and Lucius is definitely part of the > inner circle, so to speak. Can we get a quote of the textual reference in PoA? I don't recall reading anything which actually got into Snape's head and revealed any info outside of the "Harry Filter." Thanks! -- Heather M. (ps -- agreed that Snape genuinely dislikes Harry and is just not a nurturing sort of teacher. It's interesting that although he insults Harry in class, there's never been any suggestion that he *grades* Harry unfairly.) From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 14:09:45 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:09:45 -0000 Subject: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uaob9+tepd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30504 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Devika S. Lal" wrote: > If that's true, then I really hope that JKR doesn't introduce the evil > female character in OoP in the form of the new DADA teacher. I would like > to have a good DADA teacher in book 5, considering that only one out of the > four we've had so far has turned out to be "good." > If there's any evil female character introduced in GoF, I would say it was > Mrs. Lestrange (at least, I'm assuming it was Mrs. Lestrange--her name was > never actually mentioned in that scene). Maybe she'll be back in the next > book. > > Devika Or perhaps the evil character is actually Narcissa Malfoy, and she will have a bigger role in the books to come? From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 14:59:09 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 06:59:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: replies to Quidditch and house points; Snape's loyalties In-Reply-To: <9uao8a+vao0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011201145909.98812.qmail@web20803.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30505 --- Heather Moore wrote: > Can we get a quote of the textual reference in PoA? > (re. Snape liking Malfoy) I don't recall > reading anything which actually got into Snape's > head and revealed > any info outside of the "Harry Filter." Snape certainly favors Malfoy but whether this is because of genuine liking or a matter of policy, (keeping up his cover with his fellow DEs) is a unknown. I personally lean towards the latter explanation. > (ps -- agreed that Snape genuinely dislikes Harry > and is just not a > nurturing sort of teacher. It's interesting that > although he insults > Harry in class, there's never been any suggestion > that he *grades* > Harry unfairly.) Harry himself credits Dumbledore with preventing Snape from failing him but in fact this is mere assumption on his part. Harry apparently is not very good at potions and Snape marks him accordingly. IMO Snape's peculiar but very real sense of honor would not allow him to give Harry a lesser mark than he deserves. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From meboriqua at aol.com Sat Dec 1 15:04:17 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:04:17 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods (long) In-Reply-To: <3C080FFE.B85A7114@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9uarhh+361p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30506 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Philip Nel wrote: "what's the significance of asking such a question in the first place?" That is, why does Rowling have certain characters care about magical parentage, when other characters do not care in the least? What assumptions lie behind this concern over purebloods, half-bloods and "mudbloods"?> Welcome, Dr. Nel! I haven't been around for a few days and it seems I've missed some great threads around here. I am very glad to be back. What an excellent question. Rita already addressed some of the ideas I have about JKR's intentions with her clear classifications of wizards, but I wanted to add a bit. I will also try very hard to avoid using the Nazi parallel here, as it is a banned topic. Okay - Unfortunately, we live in a world where people are constantly classified and stereotyped. It sucks, but it happens everywhere and all the time. When I was a teen, I was first introduced to the notion of "restricted" country clubs, where my family would never have been able to be member because we are Jewish. Obviously, the people who run those clubs feel superior to us Jews, so they decide to not let us in. Lucius Malfoy and his friends are much the same, and, as Rita said, there is an element of feeling threatened that adds fuel to the fire of their prejudice (oooh, that sounded good). People like Malfoy are always worried, IMO, that their place in society may be taken from them if others are allowed their same privileges. History has also shown us that not being 100% is often not enough. According to Jewish law, if your mother is not Jewish, neither are you. A colleague of mine was bar mitzvahed and celebrated Jewish holidays, but encountered much resistance from Jewish communities because his mom is not Jewish. It has made him turn his back on the religion. I am sure that young Tom Riddle spent many anguished hours wondering why his father rejected his mother and why he couldn't have been born one way or the other instead of caught in between. JKR is clearly trying to show us how unfair and unreasonable people are when it comes to heritage because she makes strong examples of Mudbloods, like Hermione, being better at magic than the purest Purebloods, like Draco Malfoy. She shows us that a Halfblood like Harry (although I am not so sure that I would call him that - maybe Quarterblood is better) is tolerant and accepting of others. She also shows us that a Pureblood like Cedric is not immune to extermination by other Purebloods or that a Pureblood (or so I am assuming) like Neville is as bumbling a wizard as they come. In the end, it is definitely our choices that matter, and that titles are just titles, according to JKR, and I completely agree with her. --jenny from ravenclaw, whose fingers are humming while writing her post here *********************** From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 15:07:13 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 07:07:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Bloody Baron Question In-Reply-To: <9ua44l+5rdi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011201150713.55733.qmail@web20801.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30507 --- psammeaddd at yahoo.com wrote: > In the standard mythology, people seem to become > ghosts when they > died violent deaths (like Nearly Headless Nick, > Moaning Myrtle and, > from his name, probably the Bloody Baron as well), > or when they had > unfinished business to take care of. (I'd hate to > think something > like having a class to teach the next morning, a la > Binns, would > count as enough unfinished business to turn a person > into a ghost for > all eternity!) My personal theory is Binns' ghosthood is punishment for boring generations of students to tears and he will not be released until he actually interests and inspires a student ;) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sat Dec 1 15:13:35 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 10:13:35 -0500 Subject: Defeating Voldemort, Moody, quotes, cats, muggles, Dudley References: <1007145229.2633.99981.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C08F39F.C23231FA@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30508 Catching up from four digests. Don't you people sleep???!! ;) Cindy C. wrote: > he won't get his soul sucked out (because he probably can generate a patronus) Really? You think V. has *happy* thoughts? Actually I think this would be an interesting way around the other corner JKR has painted herself into, namely that Harry is developing a moral sense about killing that may make even killing V. a problem. Though I'm not sure I like the idea of the Dementors wandering around with Voldemort's soul. Brrrrr. Whirdy wrote: > Is it not possible that Voldemort will be redeemed by Harry Potter? Why must > it be a given or expected that death is the only solution and an unnatural > one at that? Much as I tend to prefer this sort of ending, I have a hard time seeing it with Voldemort. Wormtail, possibly, Dursleys, possibly, but Voldemort isn't "accidentally" evil or misled. Actually, I'm wondering if he'll (V.) do something self-destructive in the process of trying to kill Harry, rather than Harry actually doing him in. Probably something connected with the blood, right? Maybe if V. kills Harry now, it will make V. mortal (and maybe even kill him)? Bree wrote: > 1. Is Fudge more evil than we have perceived, and had already given > orders to the Dementor to prevent Crouch, Jr. from spilling too much? > His later behavior would be explained--he is doing damage control to > subvert Crouch, Jrs testimony. Personally, I think Fudge has crossed the line into evil. I don't think he's necessarily a V. supporter, I think he's evil on his own-- stupidly so. He's trying to maintain control over a system that's about to come apart. He may think he can deal with V. on his own, without Dumbledore, or something, but I think he disposed of Crouch Jr. as a witness on purpose. Jamie seems to agree with me: > I think we actually have three camps instead of the > perceived two. > 1 - Voldemort and the Death-Eaters > 2 - The Ministry of Magic > 3 - Dumbledore & Co. Or I agree with Jamie, take your pick. Several people have presented as evidence "because Moody knew it". Let's not forget that we haven't heard from the real Moody yet, right? What Crouch, Jr. knew could be completely different. >From Heather's quotes, my favorite is this one: "The truth is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution. 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." - Albus Dumbledore I was terribly disappointed that it got left out of that "other medium" that we don't talk about here. >Does anyone know what cats are supposed to be? There are an awful lot of associations for cats, but I think it's significant to note that JKR has said she doesn't like cats. :( And speaking of cats, all I can say about Catlady's post about Muggle and "Mudblood" prejudice is that I wish I'd written it. :) David: 'They thought they could conquer me, Dudley Dursley, in whose veins runs the blood of Godric Gryffindor himself.'" ROTFL! Elizabeth From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 1 15:23:22 2001 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (Zarleycat at aol.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:23:22 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew as Auror? In-Reply-To: <9u916m+v3dg@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uasla+ivci@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30509 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > We've talked recently about whether Lupin, Black, James or Lily might > have worked as an auror before Voldemort fell. I am starting to > wonder if Pettigrew is the most likely candidate to have worked as an > auror, for these reasons: > > 1. If Peter were an auror, it makes a bit of sense that Black would > trust him enough to make him secret-keeper. I don't think Peter's position had anything to do with it. I think, at this point, Sirius was unwilling to trust Remus, so he turned to the remaining Marauder, instead. > 2. To the extent wizards seemed so willing to believe in Sirius' > guilt, it could be because Peter was an auror and therefore believed to be unlikely to be the spy. That would assume that aurors would be a class unto themselves of wizards who would never become Voldemort supporters. I'm sure that in order to be an auror you'd undergo pretty rigorous screening and training, but I don't think that means that no auror would fall victim to V's enticements. > 4. If Peter were an auror, he would come into contact with dark > wizards and could be recruited. He also would be a valuable recruit > for Voldemort because the quality of his information would be so > good. Well, you can't have it both ways. If, in point 4, Peter could be recruited by V because of his contacts with dark wizards, then point 2 is negated. > 5. If Peter were an auror, he probably ought to know that Snape was > a DE, because Moody knew it. I'm not sure which way that cuts, > though, so maybe someone can finish that thought. I'm not convinvced that all the DEs knew one another. I see their organization as being set up in cells where some people know others, but only the highest level know lots of DEs. No canon support for that, it's just my opinion. > 6. Another thought is that Peter outsmarts Sirius in their duel, > having planned the whole thing out quite brilliantly. It sounds like > something a cagey auror would think of. "Duel" is stretching the case just a bit. I'm sure that Sirius was hot on the trail of Peter, but since Peter already had a plan and Sirius was operating under a state of shock at the betrayal and deaths of his closest friends, Peter had the advantage. ANd how did Sirius find Peter, anyway, unless Peter left some clues to draw Sirius to the crowded street, where he was already prepared to make sure Sirius took the fall? > 7. Peter knows how to perform Avada Kedavra, which is something > Crouch Sr. authorized the aurors to use. According to Crouch/Moody, > Avada Kedavra requires "a powerful bit of magic behind it," so > a "talentless" thing like Peter might not be able to perform it > absent training that aurors might receive. Or absent DE training. I'm of the opinion that Peter was not as hopeless a wizard as people thought. I think he was content to ride along on James' and Sirius' coattails as a student and use them for help. Maybe he figured out that he didn't have to put out a lot of effort to do things - by playing helpless, he could get James and Sirius to do things for him. This, of course, worked to reinforce the opinion that professors had of him, and also that Sirius had of him, that he was talentless. I'm beginning to think that his talent was that he was the perfect parasite. One final thought, if Peter was an auror, Sirius and James would probably have known. Aurors have to have some skill as wizards. If that was the case, then the basis of Sirius' plan on switching Secret Keepers, depending, as he said, that no one would think of a weak, talentless thing like Peter being the Secret Keeper, doesn't work. That it didn't work anyway was due to Peter's treachery. Perhaps one of the hard lessons Sirius had to learn in Azkaban was that you can't always take people at face value, along with the fact that you can be too clever for your own good... Marianne From Joanne0012 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 15:29:00 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:29:00 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods (long) In-Reply-To: <9uarhh+361p@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uasvs+66f2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30510 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Jenny from Ravenclaw" wrote: > When I was a teen, I was first introduced to the notion > of "restricted" country clubs, where my family would never have been > able to be member because we are Jewish. Obviously, the people who > run those clubs feel superior to us Jews, so they decide to not let us > in. Actually, my experience with people like that is that often they feel *inferior*, saying things like the Jews will take over if we let them in (e.g., a country club) or if we don't set quotas (e.g., many prestigious colleges in the not-too-distant past). Remember, the wizarding world is hiding from muggles because of persecution, and goes to great lengths to stay in hiding, so any muggle contact, including students from muggle families, is a threat to their security. If they weren't afraid of the mudbloods, they could just disdain them and let them fail on their on merits, which we all know isn't going to happen. > JKR is clearly trying to show us how unfair and unreasonable people > are when it comes to heritage because she makes strong examples of > Mudbloods, like Hermione, being better at magic than the purest > Purebloods, like Draco Malfoy. Further evidence that the prejudice of the Malfoys et al. is based on fear rather than a true feeling of superiority. From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 1 15:58:38 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 15:58:38 -0000 Subject: Can Voldemort Conjure a Patronus (WAS Defeating Voldemort, ) In-Reply-To: <3C08F39F.C23231FA@sun.com> Message-ID: <9uaune+bjdm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30511 Elizabeth wrote: > Really? You think V. has *happy* thoughts? Oh, yes, I think Voldemort has happy thoughts sufficient to conjure a patronus. Not "skipping-through-a-field-of-daisies" happy thoughts, though. Voldemort, as an Evil Overlord, might conjure a patronus by thinking of things he'd like to accomplish that would make him happy. Killing Dumbledore. Killing Harry. Conquering the world. After all, Voldemort got quite a rush when he thought he was about to kill Harry in GoF: "A little break," said Voldemort, the slit-like nostrils dilating with excitement . . . I think canon supports the idea that the happy thought needed to conjure a patronus needn't be an actual memory, BTW. It can be a wish or desire. In the maze, Harry conjures a patronus based on the desire of "getting out of the maze and celebrating with Ron and Hermione." So, Voldemort's evil desires, bent though they may be, probably would be happy enough to allow him to conjure a patronus. I guess it is possible that a thought has to be objectively happy, meaning that it would make anybody happy, not just someone who hopes to kill his nemesis and dominate the world. But I didn't really see much in canon that suggests that a patronus can only be conjured based on happy memories that would be happy for someone else. I assumed conjuring a patronus was very subjective, so it will work based on whatever makes a particular individual sufficiently happy. Cindy (wondering if Harry could conjure a patronus by thinking of the money in his Gringotts vault) From linnet323 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 15:17:33 2001 From: linnet323 at aol.com (linnet323 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:17:33 EST Subject: Elusive Ravenclaws Message-ID: <39.1e982dc4.293a4e8d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30512 > Joshua Dyal wrote: > >Hermione seems that way on the surface because we don't really know > >any Ravenclaws (how come the Gryffindors have classes with the > >Hufflepuffs and Slytherins so often, but not the Ravenclaws?) > > Liquidfire at mindgate.net wrote: We DO know at least one Ravenclaw: Cho Chang. > so-dashingly named Roger Davies. But you have > a point; I want to see more > Ravenclaws! > > It's really the invisible house, isn't it? We don't know who the head of the house is (Prof. Vector??). We don't know who the house ghost is (the Gray Lady?). And the Gryffindors never take classes with the Ravenclaws, although they have lots of classes with the Slytherins (Flying in SS/PS, Care of Magical Creatures, & Potions) and 1 with the Hufflepuffs (Herbology). Since we never see the Gyffindors in the Astronomy course they're taking (SS, p. 246, PoA exams "in the tallest tower"), maybe there are Ravenclaws there?? But there are a few other Ravenclaws mentioned: Penelope Clearwater, the Ravenclaw Prefect Sorted in SS/PS: Terry Boot, Mandy Brocklehurst, Lisa Turpin. Later we find out Padma Patil is in Ravenclaw. And I guess the mystery students are another possibility: Morag MacDougal, Moon, Nott, Sally-Anne Perks -- Linnet [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From linnet323 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 15:26:32 2001 From: linnet323 at aol.com (linnet323 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 10:26:32 EST Subject: Percy Weasley and his ambitions Message-ID: <103.d12b6c8.293a50a8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30513 << From: "Eric Oppen" Subject: Percy Weasley and his ambitions I would bet that there were Death Eaters from all the houses, as well...otherwise investigation would have been much easier; just go after all the Slytherin alumni and investigate them. (I can see a wizarding version of Senator Joe McCarthy yelling "Are you now, or have you ever been...a SLYTHERIN?")>> I don't know what will happen to Percy, if anything, but the arguments that "he's a Gryffindor or he's a Weasley so he couldn't possibly..." come across as invitations to JKR to stand those expectations on their heads. Of course, it's equally likely that she's setting Percy up as a red herring younger-generation false-DE for future books & he'll really save the day. Although Slytherin has turned out more dark wizards than any other house, the other houses have some capability in that regard (Pettigrew). No one thinks Sirius couldn't have been a LV supporter since he was a Gryffindor. And as for family, Percy could be our prototypical black sheep. Anyone who gets deeply immersed in small and deeply boring books called Prefects Who Gained Power [CoS] bears watching. Maybe the courage that the Sorting Hat (TSH) detected has been subsumed by ambition; maybe Percy and TSH had a similar coversation to Harry's with TSH and Percy begged TSH to put him in Bill & Charlie's house. The series has been setting up a tension is between those who believe lineage is all (Lucius) vs. those who believe we all have important choices (Dumbledore) that determine our destinies. The books, though, tread a middle ground [so far]: that there is a point where a character has made enough choices that he/she is firmly launched on one path or the other & there's no turning back. The exception is Quirrel meeting up w/LV in Albania. [Snape is an impenetrable mystery; I'm convinced that any prediction I make would be wrong.] Other than Quirrel, so far, the characters seem pretty set, and even when it appears that someone has changed paths, it turns out to be all a Big Mistake (Sirius, Madeye), and they've still got their Hearts in the Right (or wrong) Place. That's a reassuring message for a children's series -- for an adult, it would be interesting to see someone really change direction since I'm not sure 3 more books of mistaken identities (Quirrel/Snape, Riddle/Hagrid, Sirius/Pettigrew, Moody/Crouch, Jr.) will hold me, vs. my 9yo daughter. Short of a major shift in a strong character's orientation toward evil, I think JKR will play with her ambivalent characters (Percy and/or Ludo and/or Draco and, of course, Peter) to deepen the books without losing her core audience. All that said, I do think old Perce is a red herring who seems to be flirting w/ ambition but will turn out okay, based on his white-facedness when Ron is rescued for task #2. -- Linnet [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Calypso8604 at aol.com Sat Dec 1 16:21:51 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:21:51 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Elusive Ravenclaws Message-ID: <3a.1ea27c4b.293a5d9f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30514 In a message dated 12/1/2001 11:15:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, linnet323 at aol.com writes: > It's really the invisible house, isn't it? It really is! All we know is what JKR has said in chats, such as Flitwick being the House head and the Grey Lady being the ghost. The only Ravenclaws we know are objects of affection from Gryffindors or Fleur. We only Penny because it's Percy's girlfriend, we only know Cho because Harry likes her, and we only know Roger because Fleur went with him to the Yule Ball. Ravenclaw is the only house that has never had any spotlight time. Gryffindor is obviously the main focus of the books with their rival gouse Slytherin having the second most "air time". Hufflepuff even has quite a bit of attention when some of them were suspicious of Harry is CoS and when they had a school champion in their house. Ravenclaw is only mentioned for Quidditch - Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 1 16:40:25 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:40:25 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Bloody Baron Question References: <9ua44l+5rdi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <001801c17a86$e0fd7d80$588801d5@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 30515 psammeaddd Wrote: > Also, as Peeves is a poltergeist, maybe he's different from the > others. I'm pretty sure a poltergeist is just another kind of ghost > (I think it translates to "noisy ghost"), but is it supposed to be a > spirit that never was human, or do human troublemakers turn into > poltergeists when they die? I can't remember who told me this but I have read it in books since: a poltergeist is some sort of spiritual energy, it was never human. The energy is subconsciously created by teenage girls, especially those that are depressed or have very strong feelings at the time and given the amount of teenage girls at the school it is possible this could be the case with Peeves. Also the fact he seems to be colour rather than grey/silver/transparent like the other ghosts shows that he is not quite the same. He is always described as wearing bright colours (see CofS - NHN's deathday party) while the ghosts themselves, even their clothes are grey/silver/transparent. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 1 16:53:26 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:53:26 -0000 Subject: Death-eater in Mystery students? (was Elusive Ravenclaws) References: <39.1e982dc4.293a4e8d@aol.com> Message-ID: <003601c17a88$b442c460$588801d5@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 30516 Linnet Wrote: And I guess the mystery students (of Ravenclaw) are another possibility: Morag MacDougal, Moon, Nott, Sally-Anne Perks. Something here that I find interesting. Wasn't there a Nott mentioned as one of the death eater near the end of book 4, either by LV or when Harry is reading out the names to Fudge and Dumbledore? Could the "Nott" mentioned in the sorting possibly be a son/daughter and if so are they in Slytherin? Has anyone noticed any other names that have been mentioned that sound similar to death eaters so far I have noticed Nott (see above) and McNair (mentioned by LV at the end of book 4 and was the executioner of Buckbeak). There was another one but I can't remember it at the moment and I haven't got time to check it at the moment. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From writer at ealasaid.com Sat Dec 1 17:08:34 2001 From: writer at ealasaid.com (Ealasaid A. Haas) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 09:08:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Bloody Baron Question References: <9ua44l+5rdi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C090E92.643AACD9@ealasaid.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30517 psammeaddd at yahoo.com wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Whirdy at a... wrote: > > Why is Peeves (and what is his status) terrified of the Bloody Baron? > > > Dunno - maybe he was responsible for the Bloody Baron's demise! My guess is that the Baron is nasty enough to harm Peeves if Peeves annoys him. It would make sense for ghosts to be able to physically affect one another. > Also, as Peeves is a poltergeist, maybe he's different from the > others. I'm pretty sure a poltergeist is just another kind of ghost > (I think it translates to "noisy ghost"), but is it supposed to be a > spirit that never was human, or do human troublemakers turn into > poltergeists when they die? My understanding from my own family's lore is that poltergeists don't necessarily have the same amount of personality as ghosts. They may have habits and names, but they lack that certain person-ness, for lack of a better word, that ghosts have. You don't get the sense necessarily that they used to be a living person. They're more like collections of annoying habits. This makes sense within the HP canon, as Sir Nicholas seems to have an unlife of sorts - trying to get into the headless hunt, hanging out with the other ghosts, etc - but Peeves is just a nuisance. You could have a conversation with Sir Nick, but not with Peeves. Ealasaid -- "This is way beyond my ken... and my Barbie, and all my action figures." --Lorne, "Angel" berfan * Warped English Major Emerita * Obsessive Web Designer Email: writer at ealasaid.com * Web: www.ealasaid.com * ICQ: 45667358 From wgsilvester at shaw.ca Sat Dec 1 17:19:53 2001 From: wgsilvester at shaw.ca (Bill) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 17:19:53 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists Message-ID: <9ub3fp+v457@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30518 The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology defines a poltergeist as follows: "Poltergeist is a German word signifying literally a spirit (geist) that makes a noise or uproar (polter). From the various accounts of what are termed poltergeist phenomena emerge the following typical manifestations - not every one, of course, being found in every example. 1) Noises or knockings without apparent natural origin, on walls or ceilings, or footsteps on floors or staircases. 2) Uncontrolled movement (telekinesis) of small objects....which are sometimes broken and at other times come to rest slowly, in apparent defiance of gravity. 3) Disappearance of small objects and their subsequent recovery in unexpected hiding places. 4) Occasional major disasters, such as arson" Some other interesting statements about poltergeists: "In most recorded cases, poltergeist phenomena are found associated with some one person, often with younger children, especially girls......." "People are not often physically injured by poltergeists......" The Encyclopedia devotes 4 pages to poltergeists. I would be interested in some thoughts on where Peeves fits into the above. From aiz24 at hotmail.com Sat Dec 1 19:25:11 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:25:11 -0500 Subject: Killing wizards - Going Seekerless - Classifying by "blood," hair color, and vis Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30519 Cindy wrote: >There are a lot of ways to kill humans, but precious few ways to kill >wizards (that we've actually seen so far, anyway). JKR is revealing them in dribs and drabs. We didn't learn about AK until Goblet of Fire, even though we had a hint of it way back in PS/SS 2. If she can wait that long to tell us what the green light is all about, she can have other horrors hiding up her sleeve, and undoubtedly does. I'm also sure she has known from the beginning whether Voldemort will meet his end, and if yes, how. (Side note: wizards are human and, IMHO, can be killed in the usual ways, e.g. by being knocked off a broomstick. They just have more defenses than Muggles.) >Cindy (secretly hoping Voldemort will meet his maker at the tentacles of >the giant squid) YES! Love it! And there's even foreshadowing in CS, when Ron speculates that Tom Riddle's accomplishment might have been to save a teacher from the giant squid . . . no? No takers? Joanne wrote: >the team >that catches the snitch doesn't necessarily win the game. You are right, of course. Back to Q Strategy for the Strategically Clueless for me. Megan wrote: >Harry, is most definitely (IMNSHO) a pureblood, being born to two >full-blown wizards. So would a half-blood and a pureblood make >quater-blood? Does anyone know the rules for this sort of thing? and Luke wrote: >Since there is no conflicting evidence and one piece of consistent >(though not strictly corroboratory) evidence, I recommend we take >Riddle's statement at face value and assume Harry is a half-blood. We are deep into the insane logic of racism here. There are no rules; there are only thin justifications for the racism of V and followers. The math doesn't work like real-life fractions, or else the fact that Harry and Riddle both had the same number of Muggle and magical grandparents (2 and 2) would mean that they are both halfblood; but in fact both of Harry's parents were magical and only one of Voldemort's was. 1/4 plus 1/4 does not equal 1/2. And just the same, Harry can be dismissed as a halfblood if a DE type is inclined that way, as Riddle is. Phil boldly suggested: >If I may be so bold as to suggest it, the question that should be asked is >not "is this >character half-blood or pureblood?" but "what's the significance of asking >such a question in >the first place?" That is, why does Rowling have certain characters care >about magical >parentage, when other characters do not care in the least? What >assumptions lie behind this >concern over purebloods, half-bloods and "mudbloods"? Exactly! IMO, the lack of consistency in the use of terms like "blood," "halfblood," "pureblood," etc. points up the essential illogic of the so-called science of racial classification. Who pays the most attention to these classifications, and when and why? Mostly Voldemort and supporters (including Draco), as Rita said, but also those who abhor this logic: -Voldemort and his supporters (including Draco), in attempts to classify others as inferior -Hagrid in GF 24, as quoted earlier: "Yeh know what I'd love, Harry? I'd love yeh ter win, I really would. It'd show 'em all . . . yeh don' have ter be pure-blood ter do it." At a time when he's particularly sensitive about his own mixed parentage, he's eager to prove what he and the Trio already know (after all, Neville can hardly stand a cauldron right way up, and they haven't invented a spell our Hermione can't do) -Harry, in response to Riddle in CS 17: "'But I know why you couldn't *kill* me. Because my mother died to save me. My common *Muggle-born* mother,' he added, shaking with suppressed rage." Like Hagrid in the above quote, he's seizing on the racists' logic to turn it against them. As Hagrid says, "Dumbledore's the one who's got it righ', lettin' anyone in as long as they can do magic" (GF 24). Magic is magic, regardless of one's origins. Riddle is trying to fool himself (or psych Harry out) if he thinks Harry's abilities are lessened by his having Muggle grandparents. John wrote: >Ron has red hair and is ergo, Q.E.D., evil. ::vbeg:: I see a new splinter group in the offing: Redheads Are People, Too, and REally Aren't Death-Eaters Regardless of Slander (RAPT READERS). No non-redheads need apply. Those who attempt to infiltrate our ranks with a dye job will be detected with a "Henna Revelare!" Rita wrote: >someone suggested that . . . all the characters with eyeglasses are >Gryffindors. I >haven't checked on the latter statement. Gryffindors with glasses: Harry, James, Dumbledore, Percy, Arthur Unknowns with glasses: Myrtle, Mr. Borgin, McGonagall, Rita Skeeter Did I miss anyone? I would just like to note that red and auburn hair crops up in Gryffindor quite often. Amy Z ---------------------------------------------- Harry liked this clock. It was completely useless if you wanted to know the time, but otherwise very informative. -HP and the Goblet of Fire ---------------------------------------------- _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From aiz24 at hotmail.com Sat Dec 1 19:55:30 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 19:55:30 -0000 Subject: vision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ubcji+hlc2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30520 I wrote: > Unknowns with glasses: Myrtle, Mr. Borgin, McGonagall, Rita Skeeter > > Did I miss anyone? Yes, I did. Add Trelawney to the myopic unknowns. Amy Z From jbailey at rogershsa.com Sat Dec 1 20:25:55 2001 From: jbailey at rogershsa.com (Jason Bailey) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:25:55 -0900 Subject: Binns was Re: A Bloody Baron Question In-Reply-To: <20011201150713.55733.qmail@web20801.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20011201150713.55733.qmail@web20801.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16154604046.20011201112555@rogershsa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30521 Rowena said: RGF> My personal theory is Binns' ghosthood is RGF> punishment for boring generations of students to tears RGF> and he will not be released until he actually RGF> interests and inspires a student ;) Eww! That'll never happen, remember in CoS when he actually starts to interest the class with the story of the CoS...he couldn't handle it...had to go right back to goblin rebellions (makes me wonder if the goblins will have another uprising in these books or if goblin rebellions are just something that sounds dry & boring). Rowena's theory may be right, but that seems more of a punishment for these students than for Binns. From lbuske at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 20:57:43 2001 From: lbuske at yahoo.com (lbuske at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 20:57:43 -0000 Subject: Potters In-Reply-To: <9tv26b+7ti1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubg87+39et@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30522 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Hayes" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., MurielP at a... wrote: > > The thing that bugs me about this whole scene with Voldemort & the > > Potters is what Dumbledore says in the begining of Book 1. Prof. > > McGonagall asks Dumbledore if he knows how Harry survived > Voldomort's > > attack on him and Dumbledore says that he doesn't know & that we > may > > never know. So I wonder if the reason Harry survived & the reason > > Voldomort went to the house in the first place are two different > > reasons all together. And if the reason Voldomort went to the > Potter's > > in the first place is related to the past to Slytherin & Gryffindor > > then how come Dumbledore did not know how Harry su > > I believe the word you were looking for was 'survive'. :) Anyway, my > name is Hayes and ve been lurking about the last couple of...months. > About this last topic, I have nothing to add to help clarify it. > Simply more to give us to wonder about. In the first chapter, > Dumbledore does say that he has no idea how Harry survived. And yet, > by the final chapter of SS, Dumbledore is able to give Harry an > answer about how he lived (i.e. Lily's love). How did he figure this > out in the course of a year at Hogwarts? > > Well, that's my two cents. Later, > > Hayes of Ravenclaw, 4th year Well, he didn't have only a year, remember, in the first chapter, Harry was only a year old. By the time Dumbledore tells Harry he lived because of Lily's love, Harry was 12. I guess by then, he had it figured out! From jbailey at rogershsa.com Sat Dec 1 20:59:57 2001 From: jbailey at rogershsa.com (Jason Bailey) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 11:59:57 -0900 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: vision In-Reply-To: <9ubcji+hlc2@eGroups.com> References: <9ubcji+hlc2@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <056646533.20011201115957@rogershsa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30523 Hello Amy, Saturday, December 01, 2001, 10:55:30 AM, you wrote: AZ> I wrote: >> Unknowns with glasses: Myrtle, Mr. Borgin, McGonagall, Rita Skeeter AZ> Yes, I did. Add Trelawney to the myopic unknowns. Ummm. McGonagall is head of Gryffindor house. I think it would be fair to say she is a Gryffindor. From philnel at ksu.edu Sat Dec 1 20:58:54 2001 From: philnel at ksu.edu (Philip Nel) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 14:58:54 -0600 Subject: Mudbloods References: <1007213215.1745.18383.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C09448D.39A1A8B9@ksu.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30524 Dear all, Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) writes: > You must be the author of that book I just ordered from Amazon based > entirely on Penny's recommendation on this list! Yes, that's me. > The bad guys care about pedigrees and the good guys don't. I suppose > that, rather than being a handy way to tell the good guys from the > bad guys (I don't think Ernie Macmillan is a bad guy despite the > quote above), it's a mildly preachy way of condemning both racism and > the class system (both based on pedigrees). The Death Eaters have an > obvious resemblance to Nazis and NeoNazis (including following their > charismatic leader), and also an obvious resemblance to the Ku Klux > Klan (someone on list pointed out how similar the costumes are). > > The prejudice is not bound into law like Jim Crow laws, the Death > Eater organization was not invented by leading members of the > government to enforce customs generally accepted as laws, and the > wizarding racists show no sign of wanting to keep the Muggleborn > around as cheap and subservient labor. They just want to eliminate > (kill) the Muggleborn. Rowling has admitted that Voldemort is like Hitler (see the CBC "Hot Type" interview), but what fascinates me is that, while it's true that "bad guys care about pedigrees" and "good guys don't," the distinction between "good guy" and "bad guy" is not so neatly defined. In _Goblet of Fire_, Ron reveals a learned prejudice against giants: When asked, "What's the problem with giants?" he has a hard time justifying himself. "Well, they're...they're...not very nice," he says "lamely" (chapter 23). Cornelius Fudge is not only prejudiced against giants -- as he reveals at the end of chapter 29 ("Dumbledore, you know what that woman is?") -- but against "Mudbloods," too. As Dumbledore says to Fudge, "You place too much importance, and you always have done, on the so-called purity of blood!" (chapter 36). And not only Fudge but Mrs. Weasley is susceptible to the rumor-spreading Rita Skeeter -- Fudge believes the article on Harry's alleged madness (chapter 36), Mrs. Weasley believes that Hermione was two-timing Harry (chapter 31). Rowling understands that prejudice is insidious, subtle, and easily fed by rumor. Not only do powerful people harbor prejudices but the apparently "good" characters hold many unexamined assumptions about certain "types." So, it's true that Rowling is condemning racism, but she's also saying that racism is not the exclusive province of the "bad guys." And prejudice is, indeed, entangled with the legal system. In fact, there seem to be laws combating prejudice as well as laws tacitly condoning it. For an example of anti-racist legislation, recall Arthur Weasley's Muggle Protection Act (mentioned in _Chamber of Secrets_). However, recall, too, the caste system upon which the wizarding world operates. To my knowledge, there are no laws preventing discrimination against giants (or half-giants) -- which is why Madame Maxime conceals her giant parentage and Hagrid doesn't broadcast his. The social structure of the wizarding world depends upon labor provided by house-elves who, clearly, do not have the same degree of rights that wizards have. And what of the status of goblins? I don't think that their role in the wizarding society has been as clearly defined as the house-elves' role has been, but we do hear of the goblin rebellions, and we know that goblins seem relegated exclusively to jobs dealing with money. The goblins are money-lenders: they run the bank, and the loan money to Ludo Bagman. So, that's why I asked these questions in the first place. To ask what percentage of "pureblood" heritage a character has is to ask the question of a prejudiced character; in fact, asking such a question unconsciously replicates the very belief systems that Rowling criticizes. On the other hand, asking *why* certain characters are obsessed about heritage allows us to think critically about the cultural beliefs of the wizarding world. Best regards, Phil -- Philip Nel Assistant Professor Department of English Denison Hall Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506-0701 U.S.A. ----------------------------------------- http://www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/ philnel at ksu.edu From Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com Sat Dec 1 20:07:30 2001 From: Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com (Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 15:07:30 EST Subject: Nott Message-ID: <92.1e1969e1.293a9282@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30525 I'm not sure who it was-but someone said they thought there was a 'Nott' among the Death Eaters as well as a 'Nott' at Hogwarts. If it hasn't already been done, I would like to confirm that this is true. However, I don't think they mention which house 'Nott' gets into, do they? I wonder if it'll give the character more signifigance.... ~Cassie~ From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Dec 1 21:31:58 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 21:31:58 -0000 Subject: Nott In-Reply-To: <92.1e1969e1.293a9282@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ubi8e+g4cm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30526 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Evil1ClaudeRains at a... wrote: > I'm not sure who it was-but someone said they thought there was a 'Nott' > among the Death Eaters as well as a 'Nott' at Hogwarts. If it hasn't already > been done, I would like to confirm that this is true. > > However, I don't think they mention which house 'Nott' gets into, do they? I > wonder if it'll give the character more signifigance.... > >From the Sorting Hat episode in SS/PS, Chapter 7: There weren't many people left now. "Moon" "Nott" "Parkinson" then a pair of twin girls, "Patil" and "Patil" then "Perks, Sally-Anne" and then, at last -- "Potter, Harry!" - CMC From rucham78 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 21:57:25 2001 From: rucham78 at yahoo.com (rucham78 at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 21:57:25 -0000 Subject: After the KISS Message-ID: <9ubjo5+coo9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30527 Has it ever been mentioned in canon what happens to the witch or wizard who has been kissed by a Dementor? I know that the soul is kissed, but does the witch remain alive? Can this witch then function as a magic person? So you think s/he can talk/walk/so magic after being kissed, or do they become vegetables? [Are they taken to St. Mungo's and killed, like pulling the plug on someone who is alive only by virtue of respirator?] It is dreadful to be KISSED as I gather from canon, but can one go back and learn about magic? Become a magic person again? Any thoughts? Rucha From klawzie at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 21:50:29 2001 From: klawzie at yahoo.com (Klawzie) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 13:50:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ravenclaw & classes In-Reply-To: <9u91uf+4g0n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011201215029.72829.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30528 Joshua Dyal said: > > > any Ravenclaws (how come the Gryffindors have > > > classes with the Hufflepuffs and Slytherins so > > >often, but not the Ravenclaws?) Well, Ravenclaws are supposed to be the very smart ones, right? What if they're kept seperate so as not to "slow down" their learning processes? Having taken two art classes in college, I know how frustrating it is to be 'held back' when they're covering something I already know how to do. However, when we're covering things I'm not very good with (but it seems other students are), I feel cheated that we move so fast/annoyed at myself for not being 'with it' enough to keep up with the others - so I don't ask as many questions, so I won't hold the others back. I think this is the reason you don't seem to have any of the other Houses (not that I'm aware of, anyway) taking classes with Ravenclaw. It's fairer to the other students. I don't know the books quite by heart yet, so if you can come up with an example of Slytherin/Hufflepuff taking classes with Ravenclaw, I'd like to hear it. ^_^ ~Klawz klawz_hangar at hangar@hotmail.com http://klawzie.tripod.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 1 22:03:11 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:03:11 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods (and Marriage) In-Reply-To: <3C09448D.39A1A8B9@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ubk2v+vaj9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30529 Philip wrote: > And prejudice is, indeed, entangled with the legal system. In >fact, there seem to be laws combating prejudice as well as laws >tacitly condoning it. For an example of anti-racist legislation, >recall Arthur Weasley's Muggle Protection Act (mentioned in _Chamber >of Secrets_). I have always found it interesting that, given the blatant prejudice that seems to infect the wizarding world, certain laws you might expect to see are not in place. In the pre-civil rights era U.S., there was a feeling among certain people that the races should not mix. This resulted in segregation (as has been mentioned already) and laws prohibiting interracial marriage. I cannot think of any similar restrictions on marriage in the wizarding world. Wizards can definitely marry muggles, giants and veela, and so far as I can tell, they suffer no harrassment or even diminished status by doing so (although their offspring seem to). Given that wizards are apparently attempting to avoid detection by muggles, and given that wizards generally believe themselves somewhat superior to muggles, I am frankly surprised that wizards are allowed to marry muggles. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that such restrictions should exist in the wizarding world. I am just saying that they might be consistent with the wizarding world as JKR has conceived it, so their omission does surprise me. Perhaps we can conclude from the lack of marital restrictions that wizards have their biases and prejudices, but perhaps their biases are not so deeply held as those found in Muggle history because wizards don't restrict the fundamental right to choose a suitable mate. Cindy From aiz24 at hotmail.com Sat Dec 1 22:12:42 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:12:42 -0000 Subject: McGonagall's house/Gryffindors in Glasses In-Reply-To: <056646533.20011201115957@rogershsa.com> Message-ID: <9ubkkq+rm4s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30530 Jason wrote: > McGonagall is head of Gryffindor house. I think it would be fair > to say she is a Gryffindor. Fair, but not conclusive. I'm just trying to adhere to the L.O.O.N. standard. (I would bet Borgin isn't one, also, but do we really believe no Dark wizard has ever come out of Gryffindor? So I'll leave him as an unknown.) So we have quite a lot of Gryffindors with glasses. Of course, we know more Gryffindors than any others, but there's a whole world of magical folk out there whose houses are unknown and who don't wear glasses, so I'd guess we're looking at a statistically significant trend. Other than the natural and obvious superiority of people with imperfect vision , what might JKR be trying to say? My 2 knuts is that it's another, subtler message that physical might, physical attractiveness, and genetic superiority have no correlation with bravery or any other desirable character trait. I like it that the hero of the wizarding world is this scrawny four-eyed kid (glasses broken, no less) with ill-fitting clothes, permanently mussed hair and no particular physical attraction. Amy Z ----------------------------------------------- Harry remembered how touchy Myrtle had always been about being dead, but none of the other ghosts he knew made such a fuss about it. -HP and the Goblet of Fire ----------------------------------------------- From oppen at cnsinternet.com Sat Dec 1 22:19:23 2001 From: oppen at cnsinternet.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:19:23 -0600 Subject: Wizard attitudes towards Muggles Message-ID: <00d101c17ab6$3b882820$dec71bce@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 30531 It occurs to me that acts such as Arthur Weasley's Muggle Protection Act might not be motivated by pure, disinterested love of us Muggles. Instead, down deep, Arthur W. could be just as prejudiced against Muggles as Lucius Malfoy, but just express it differently, even to himself. Instead of "those Muggles are scum, we should get rid of or enslave them," it might be more along the lines of "oh, those poor Muggles---they could never, ever handle the truth, they're so limited and feeble-minded. As a wizard, it's my job to keep the truth from them, just as I would keep a charged wand out of the hands of a chimpanzee." Forgive me, but neither attitude really pleases me. I think myself that many or most Muggles could easily handle knowing about the existence of the wizarding world (after all, the Dursleys know, at least---and if _they_ can handle the knowledge without going mad(der), who can't?) They say that we work hard to deny the existence of magic, while at the same time they've got wizards whose whole _job_ is to modify Muggle memories so that we don't know it's there. Although I love all the Weasleys, they do show a lot of the prejudice of their pure-blood wizard background when they say things like this. I wonder how Hermione felt (I think she was around when Arthur was barbering on about how Muggles just couldn't handle knowing that magic was out there) since I'm sure that her parents knew where she went and why and what she was studying. In fact, I think that now that Lord V is back, she's probably had to tell them things that might disquiet them. "_This_ is safe enough to do, and so is _this,_ and so is _this._ On the other hand, _that_ is very dangerous...and, for Heaven's sake, if someone calling himself 'Tom Riddle,' 'The Dark Lord,' 'Lord Voldemort,' or 'He Who Must Not Be Named,' rings and asks for me---I'm in New Zealand and you don't know when I'll be back!" Just by being her parents, they are in the line of fire and have a right to know what's going on. It would be interesting if Lord V's downfall came from underestimating Muggles, or the talents of a Muggle-born like Hermione, wouldn't it? From joeblackish at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 22:41:43 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:41:43 -0000 Subject: James/Severus conflict Message-ID: <9ubmb7+jef0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30532 I realize that the topic of what could have caused such intense enmity between James/MWP and Severus has been covered quite thoroughly on this list, but as far as I know, this suggestion has not been brought up yet - Rather than imagining the source of the problems be a fight over a girl, does anyone think it could have something to do with jealousy of another sort? Let me explain...what if James and Severus were childhood playmates whose friendship ended badly when then came to Hogwarts and were sorted into different houses. Or maybe they met on the Hogwarts Express and enjoyed a friendly spare time aquaintance during their first year/few months/whatever at Hogwarts until James made new friends with some kids in his house. I could see Severus being so hurt by James's abandonment that he would spend an incredible amount of energy dwelling on his hatred for James's new friends. I think this fits. Severus's intense feelings of disgust towards MWPP could be perfectly well explained by jealousy over a lost friendship. His hatred for Sirius Black suggests a grudge carried over from childhood, and while I think that the almost-killing-him is enough to cause that grudge, I have always gotten the feeling that there was a lot more to it than that. Can't you just see Severus hating Sirius with such a passion all those years in Hogwarts because he stole his best friend? Abandoning old friends when new ones come along is typical behavior for children of this age, and it would be especially natural for childhood wizard friends to drift apart once they come to Hogwarts considering the amount of time they all seem to spend with their houses. This would also explain why Sirius, although he clearly doesn't like Snape, does not seem to mirror the passionate hatred Snape displays for him. Snape to him is just an annoyance, not an object of jealousy. And Harry, looking so much like James, would be a constant reminded of that first good friend who betrayed him. Now Snape has a chance to get back at him, to torture the child James in his memory, to make him feel just as awful as James made he himself feel as a child by torturing poor Harry in class. It's his first chance at vengance. But then at the same time, although he resents James so much, he has not totally let go of his affections for him, and that is why he goes so far out of his way to protect Harry all the time. He could not bear to From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 1 22:42:59 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:42:59 -0000 Subject: Killing wizards, Glasses and the Giant Squid - (WAS Going Seekerless) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ubmdj+spsc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30533 Amy Z wrote: > (Side note: wizards are human and, IMHO, can be killed in the usual ways, > e.g. by being knocked off a broomstick. They just have more defenses than > Muggles.) > Mmmmm, that's probably right. The implications of that are kind of scary, though. It means that you can kill a wizard in all of the usual ways *plus* the magical ways we've seen. Maybe we should be surprised that Moody is the only wizard suffering from a severe case of paranoia, as they all have reason to be a bit jumpy. :-) I have a hunch that wizards don't die from trauma that would kill Muggles, so long as they get to a mediwizard before they die. Which brings us to the question of why some injuries to wizards can be cured and others cannot be . . . ahem. My quick theory on glasses, BTW, is that there probably is a spell that would cure vision problems. After all, Harry could just get two magical eyes like Moody. I think a significant limitation on magical cures is similar to what we see in the muggle world -- side effects. Perhaps having a magical eye is uncomfortable or has drawbacks that make it preferable to just use spectacles. For example, walking around constantly looking through people's clothes would get distracting after a while. I wrote: > >Cindy (secretly hoping Voldemort will meet his maker at the tentacles of > >the giant squid) > Amy wrote: >And there's even foreshadowing in CS, when Ron speculates > that Tom Riddle's accomplishment might have been to save a teacher from the > giant squid . . . no? No takers? Heck, I'll take a piece of that action. :-) The conventional wisdom is that Hagrid will die in OoP. In the first four books, we've had these random mentions of the giant squid, but it has never done anything -- not even in the Second Task, and not even when Victor dives from the ship into the lake. But in GoF, we get some serious foreshadowing about this: "[Harry] looked up at Hagrid -- perhaps he had to go into the lake sometimes, to deal with the creatures in it? He looked after everything else on the grounds, after all--" My money says that Hagrid will die in OoP dealing with the giant squid. He loves monsters, his judgment is suspect, and Professor Kettleburn's experience shows that the job is dangerous. I don't wish to receive my winnings in leprechaun gold, however. Cindy From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 1 22:59:11 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 22:59:11 -0000 Subject: What is the giant squid like? References: <9ubmdj+spsc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <001501c17abb$cb0d3d00$17147bd5@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 30534 Cindy Said: My money says that Hagrid will die in OoP dealing with the giant squid. He loves monsters, his judgement is suspect, and Professor Kettleburn's experience shows that the job is dangerous. I always got the impression that the Giant Squid is actually a nice creature. Evidence: 1) Pushing Dennis Creevey back into the boat. It did not eat/drown him etc). 2) The fact that Lee Jordan and the Wealsey twins -have been said to- tickle it's tentacles. Would you do that with a dangerous beast? 3) The children in the school are not told to keep away from the lake. Surely a large squid has VERY long and VERY strong tentacles that could pull people in? 4) The children feed it. Harry and Hermione gave it toast in book 2 when they went for their walk round the lake. 5) If it was really that dangerous then task two would never have taken place in the lake. Mrs Weasley said they were trying to make it safer. Ok, they had dragons as the first task, but they also had about 40 dragon keepers on hand to deal with the ones that got out of control, who would deal with the squid? All the mer people were on their village waiting for the champions. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From twoplus3 at juno.com Sat Dec 1 23:14:25 2001 From: twoplus3 at juno.com (twoplus3 at juno.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:14:25 -0000 Subject: Gleam in Dumbledore's eyes Message-ID: <9ubo8h+65mf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30535 I know this question has been discussed at length, but there is something I picked up on last night while re-reading SS (again). In GOF, Harry thinks he sees a gleam of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes after he learns that Voldemort took his blood. In SS, Dumbledore tells Harry that his mother's protection was "in his very skin." Could this mean that Dumbledore knows that the protection was not in his blood, as V. thought, but in Harry's skin instead? I'd be interested to hear what anyone else thinks of this. It is the first time I noticed it. If it has been brought up before, I apologize. But I haven't seen it anywhere else. From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 1 23:26:35 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:26:35 -0000 Subject: What is the giant squid like? In-Reply-To: <001501c17abb$cb0d3d00$17147bd5@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9ubovb+rmlt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30536 Hollydaze wrote: > I always got the impression that the Giant Squid is actually a nice creature. > > Evidence: > 1) Pushing Dennis Creevey back into the boat. It did not eat/drown him etc). > 2) The fact that Lee Jordan and the Wealsey twins -have been said to- tickle it's tentacles. Would you do that with a dangerous beast? > 3) The children in the school are not told to keep away from the lake. Surely a large squid has VERY long and VERY strong tentacles that could pull people in? > 4) The children feed it. Harry and Hermione gave it toast in book 2 when they went for their walk round the lake. > 5) If it was really that dangerous then task two would never have taken place in the lake. Mrs Weasley said they were trying to make it safer. Ok, they had dragons as the first task, but they also had about 40 dragon keepers on hand to deal with the ones that got out of control, who would deal with the squid? All the mer people were on their village waiting for the champions. > Now that is some awesome L.O.O.N. work! I guess there are three possibilities as to how the giant squid might play a role in Hagrid's demise. First, all of the examples you cite involve children. Perhaps the squid would feel differently about an adult or a giant. Second, something could happen to upset the squid such that it lashed out in anger. I have no idea what that might be, though. Third, some evil person might bewitch the squid. Someone who doesn't like Hagrid. Someone who would be in his fifth year of magical study and might have learned enough magic to pull it off. Someone like Draco. Cindy (who was originally just kidding around) From meboriqua at aol.com Sat Dec 1 23:37:18 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:37:18 -0000 Subject: McGonagall's house/Gryffindors in Glasses In-Reply-To: <9ubkkq+rm4s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubpje+apbj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30537 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amy Z" wrote: >physical might, physical attractiveness, and genetic superiority have no correlation with bravery or any other desirable character trait. I like it that the hero of the wizarding world is this scrawny four-eyed kid (glasses broken, no less) with ill-fitting clothes, permanently mussed hair and no particular physical attraction.> While I agree with what you said about what JKR's message might be concerning those who wear glasses, I must disagree with you about Harry's lack of attractiveness (you knew I'd pipe up here, didn't you?). I find Harry quite attractive, actually. Dark hair, bright green eyes, slim, glasses, brave... oh, excuse me, I drifted for a bit. However, it is not simply his dark hair and green eyes *sigh* that makes Harry so darned appealing to me. It is, as I suspect JKR wants me to think, his inner strength and resolve, his honesty and his humility that make me swoon. Somehow Percy found a girlfriend and Krum has pursued Hermione, who is often referred to as *not* pretty, so yes, JKR wants us to all look beyond physical traits for attractiveness. --jenny from ravenclaw, completely predictable, especially to amy z, in her defense of harry fudge is the dessert of my dreams ********************* From aiz24 at hotmail.com Sun Dec 2 00:12:21 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 00:12:21 -0000 Subject: Flesh, Skin, Bone? (was Gleam in Dumbledore's eyes) In-Reply-To: <9ubo8h+65mf@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubrl5+4i6s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30538 twoplus3 wrote: > I know this question has been discussed at length, but there is > something I picked up on last night while re-reading SS (again). In > GOF, Harry thinks he sees a gleam of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes > after he learns that Voldemort took his blood. In SS, Dumbledore > tells Harry that his mother's protection was "in his very skin." > Could this mean that Dumbledore knows that the protection was not in > his blood, as V. thought, but in Harry's skin instead? > There ought to be some kind of award for people who find a glimmer of novelty in topics that we thought had been done to death. Congratulations, twoplus3! You're the first winner of the annual Blood-from-a-Stone Prize! OK, to your point. If it's Harry's skin that's effective, not his blood, then why can Voldemort touch him now? He hasn't done anything with Harry's skin. Amy Z -------------------------------------------------- "He's friends with that dog," said Harry grimly. --HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban (naturally-occurring Tom Swiftie) -------------------------------------------------- From jmyers at sunflower.com Sun Dec 2 00:12:31 2001 From: jmyers at sunflower.com (jmyers at sunflower.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 00:12:31 -0000 Subject: timeline web ref & a Grindelwald as LV's 'mentor' theory In-Reply-To: <9u5n13+melh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubrlf+o4l9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30539 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ggershman77 at y... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Gabriel Edson" wrote: > One thing which I think would help is a timeline of all the events > that are listed in the books. JKR loves to use obscure references > from previous books as major plot elements down the line. If anyone > knows of a good timeline out there, let me know! Thanks! > > Greg Here ya go Greg! http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/timelines_char.html -- My personal theory is that Grindelwald (who was defeated in 1945 by Dumbledore) was at the very least a MENTOR of LV. It was noted that Tom M. Riddle 'associated with the worst in the wizarding world' and 'underwent many dangerous transformations' after he left Hogwarts (he was Head Boy in 1944, and only '7th years' get to be Head Boys/Girls). I think that the 'coincidence' of the dates is not a coincidence at all. It is even possible that Dumbledore's defeat of Grindelwald was not a killing... and that Grindelwald was just rendered incapable of being a further threat in and of himself... and that he remained on the loose, aiding and mentoring Riddle as he transformed himself into LV. That would quite neatly explain why LV is 'afraid of' Dumbledore. -Jerry Myers From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com Sat Dec 1 23:45:44 2001 From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 23:45:44 -0000 Subject: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9ubmb7+jef0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubq38+2r10@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30540 I am new to this list, so forgive me if this topic has come up before... It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with the Dursley's, to love and to trust. I would argue that his treatment by the Dursleys borders on child abuse--psychological, emotional, and physical (when Dursley grabs Harry and is yelling at him). Certainly Harry is reticent when it comes to showing emotion (seems like I read somewhere that that is a hallmark of abused childen) but has JKR ever commented on the fact of Harry's abuse? (I'm only halfway through PofA here). Harry is an amazing kid. There's one bit in PofA, when Harry tells Lupin that he hears V. murdering his mother, that makes me just want to grab him, hold him tight, and let him know that someone cares about him, and that he's deserving of love. Or maybe it just hit a nerve with me. Nancy From cindysphynx at home.com Sun Dec 2 00:44:57 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 00:44:57 -0000 Subject: Attractive Characters (WAS McGonagall's house/Gryffindors in Glasses) In-Reply-To: <9ubpje+apbj@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubti9+o99a@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30541 Jenny wrote: > Somehow Percy found a girlfriend and Krum has pursued Hermione, who is > often referred to as *not* pretty, so yes, JKR wants us to all look > beyond physical traits for attractiveness. > You might even say that JKR *forces* us to look beyond looks. There are scores of characters in the wizarding world, but very few appear to be knock-outs, or even physically attractive. The list of the definitely and consistently attractive includes Fleur, Cedric and Cho. Sirius seems alone among the adults who is characterized as attractive. (Help me if I've missed someone who is definitely physically attractive based on his/her description in the books). The list of the unattractive and even repulsive, however, seems endless by comparison. Cindy From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Sun Dec 2 00:53:02 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 19:53:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Attractive Characters (WAS McGonagall's house/Gryffin... Message-ID: <11f.834f71b.293ad56e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30542 another adult that was characteried as pretty was Lily Potter...at least im pretty sure she was...although you're right, most characters are not described as looking particularly attractice...even ron, with his large feet and nose doesnt sound that good looking. (although in my mind he's cute :) From cindysphynx at home.com Sun Dec 2 00:53:11 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 00:53:11 -0000 Subject: Flesh, Skin, Bone? (was Gleam in Dumbledore's eyes) In-Reply-To: <9ubrl5+4i6s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ubu1n+jqq1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30543 > twoplus3 wrote: > > > I know this question has been discussed at length, but there is > > something I picked up on last night while re-reading SS (again). In > > GOF, Harry thinks he sees a gleam of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes > > after he learns that Voldemort took his blood. In SS, Dumbledore > > tells Harry that his mother's protection was "in his very skin." > > Could this mean that Dumbledore knows that the protection was not in > > his blood, as V. thought, but in Harry's skin instead? > > > Amy Z wrote: > There ought to be some kind of award for people who find a glimmer of > novelty in topics that we thought had been done to death. > Congratulations, twoplus3! You're the first winner of the annual > Blood-from-a-Stone Prize! > > OK, to your point. If it's Harry's skin that's effective, not his > blood, then why can Voldemort touch him now? He hasn't done anything > with Harry's skin. > I agree that it is amazing that twoplus3 found a new theory on this issue, and I applaud the awarding of the Blood-from-a-Stone Prize. I don't think we should give up easily on this, though. Perhaps we just have to squeeze the Stone harder. Um, maybe Lily's protection *is* in Harry's skin, as Dumbledore notes. Voldemort touched Harry's skin, true. But that is a far cry from defeating all of Lily's protection. After all, the important part of the protection is being able to deflect Avada Kedavra. So, um, maybe the gleam in Dumbledore's eye is that he knows that Voldemort thinks he has defeated both forms of protection, but Voldemort only defeated one. Voldemort's next curse against Harry will rebound as well, and he'll be just as surprised as he was the first time around. Cindy From jbailey at rogershsa.com Sun Dec 2 02:29:10 2001 From: jbailey at rogershsa.com (Jason Bailey) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:29:10 -0900 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Flesh, Skin, Bone? (was Gleam in Dumbledore's eyes) In-Reply-To: <9ubrl5+4i6s@eGroups.com> References: <9ubrl5+4i6s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <4176399356.20011201172910@rogershsa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30544 Amy wrote, AZ> twoplus3 wrote: >> I know this question has been discussed at length, but there is >> something I picked up on last night while re-reading SS (again). In >> GOF, Harry thinks he sees a gleam of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes >> after he learns that Voldemort took his blood. In SS, Dumbledore >> tells Harry that his mother's protection was "in his very skin." >> Could this mean that Dumbledore knows that the protection was not in >> his blood, as V. thought, but in Harry's skin instead? AZ> OK, to your point. If it's Harry's skin that's effective, not his AZ> blood, then why can Voldemort touch him now? He hasn't done anything AZ> with Harry's skin. Perhaps he was able to touch Harry because he meant him no harm at that particular moment. Remember, Quirrell was trying to kill him. It's all rather confusing...but I think you have to be attempting to kill Harry, not just hurt him. Otherwise Wormtail couldn't have cut him.... From clarinut76 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 02:11:06 2001 From: clarinut76 at yahoo.com (clarinut76 at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:11:06 -0000 Subject: After the KISS In-Reply-To: <9ubjo5+coo9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uc2jq+krac@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30545 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., rucham78 at y... wrote: > Has it ever been mentioned in canon what happens to the witch or > wizard who has been kissed by a Dementor? I know that the soul is > kissed, but does the witch remain alive? Can this witch then function > as a magic person? So you think s/he can talk/walk/so magic after > being kissed, or do they become vegetables? [Are they taken to St. > Mungo's and killed, like pulling the plug on someone who is alive > only by virtue of respirator?] > It is dreadful to be KISSED as I gather from canon, but can one go > back and learn about magic? Become a magic person again? > Any thoughts? > Rucha I'm new here, but it is my understanding that once a witch or wizard is kissed by a dementor, they live, but they only exist. They have no powers, no memory, no nothing. I highly doubt that after being kissed that a person can go back and re-learn about being magic. Lupin says in the third book that they only exist. No sense of self, no nothing. Rachel From jspotila at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 02:31:56 2001 From: jspotila at yahoo.com (jspotila at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:31:56 -0000 Subject: After the KISS In-Reply-To: <9ubjo5+coo9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uc3qs+a2nk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30546 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., rucham78 at y... wrote: > Has it ever been mentioned in canon what happens to the witch or > wizard who has been kissed by a Dementor? In PoA, chapter 12, Lupin tells Harry "They call it the Dementor's Kiss . . . they clamp their jaws upon the mouth of the victim and -- and suck out his soul . . . You can exist without your soul, you know, as long as your brain and heart are still working. But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, no . . . anything. There's no chance at all of recovery. You'll just exist. As an empty shell." Cheers, Jennie From jspotila at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 02:37:14 2001 From: jspotila at yahoo.com (jspotila at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:37:14 -0000 Subject: James/Severus conflict In-Reply-To: <9ubmb7+jef0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uc44q+qbsg@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30547 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., joeblackish at y... wrote: > > I realize that the topic of what could have caused such intense enmity > between James/MWP and Severus has been covered quite thoroughly on > this list, but as far as I know, this suggestion has not been brought > up yet - > > Rather than imagining the source of the problems be a fight over a > girl, does anyone think it could have something to do with jealousy of > another sort? > I think this is a great theory, but there may be a much simpler explanation. In SS, chapter 17, Dumbledore tells Harry (regarding James and Severus), "Well, they did rather detest each other. Not unlike yourself and Mr. Malfoy." Harry and Draco hate each other from the very start, before they even know each other's names. We all have visceral reactions to certain people, of intense like or dislike, almost as if our subconscious self recognizes something in the other person. I think Harry and Draco, and so by implication James and Severus, have that kind of antipathy for each other. They just rub each other the wrong way. Cheers, Jennie From jspotila at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 02:43:03 2001 From: jspotila at yahoo.com (jspotila at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 02:43:03 -0000 Subject: School houses and Dark Wizards In-Reply-To: <9ubkkq+rm4s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uc4fn+f7f5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30548 Amy Z wrote: but do we really > believe no Dark wizard has ever come out of Gryffindor? I've seen some speculation that dark wizards could come out of the other Hogwarts houses. This is possible, but Hagrid tells Harry otherwise. In SS chapter 5 he says, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." Of course, Hagrid can only be talking about known dark wizards. Perhaps there are some dark wizards still in the closet, so to speak, and they could theoretically come from the other houses. And obviously, the past is not an absolute predictor of the future. (although for now I think I'm still a member of P.I.N.E. - Percy Is Not Evil) Cheers, Jennie From margdean at erols.com Sun Dec 2 03:41:55 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:41:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mudbloods (and Marriage) References: <9ubk2v+vaj9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C09A303.89901AC7@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30549 "Cindy C." wrote: > Perhaps we can conclude from the lack of marital restrictions that > wizards have their biases and prejudices, but perhaps their biases > are not so deeply held as those found in Muggle history because > wizards don't restrict the fundamental right to choose a suitable > mate. It could also be partly a matter of survival. Ron remarks at one point "If we hadn't married Muggles we'd have all died out by now." Maybe the wizarding community by itself is too small to prevent dangerous inbreeding. (Draco Malfoy, now, seems like the epitome of the shockingly inbred aristocrat to me. :) ) --Margaret Dean From editor at texas.net Sun Dec 2 03:48:35 2001 From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 21:48:35 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] School houses and Dark Wizards References: <9uc4fn+f7f5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C09A491.A85BE591@texas.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30550 jspotila at yahoo.com wrote: > Amy Z wrote: > > but do we really > > believe no Dark wizard has ever come out of Gryffindor? > > I've seen some speculation that dark wizards could come out of the > other Hogwarts houses. This is possible, but Hagrid tells Harry > otherwise. In SS chapter 5 he says, "There's not a single witch or > wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." The list has generally taken this comment of Hagrid's to be exaggeration for emphasis. Reason mainly being, I believe, that Sirius Black is believed (known? has JKR said?) to be a Gryffindor, all that foursome are thought to have been, and at the point when Hagrid says this, he and the rest of the world believe Sirius to have gone significantly bad. And later, Pettigrew shows himself to be rather bad as well. Were half of the Marauders in Slytherin? Interesting. How *could* a weenie like Pettigrew be a Gryffindor?--but he *does* do warped-brave things like cut off his own finger. Minutiae of canon aside, and probably more significantly, I don't think JKR would allow such a blanket generality to be true in her universe. One of the major themes of these books is that the world is NOT black and white, you better get used to gray. Having all bad wizards be Slytherins goes against the complexity she's trying to get across. It's too easy. --Amanda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From editor at texas.net Sun Dec 2 04:08:20 2001 From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:08:20 -0600 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods References: <1007213215.1745.18383.m12@yahoogroups.com> <3C09448D.39A1A8B9@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <3C09A933.F32A9332@texas.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30551 Philip Nel wrote: > The social structure of the wizarding world depends upon labor > provided by house-elves who, clearly, do not have the same degree of > rights that wizards have. There was a spirited debate a while back, on whether the house-elves *want* this. If someone firmly and repeatedly seeks a certain role and is happy in it, and alteration of their role causes them grief, is that alteration doing any good to the recipient? Not to mention the upheaval in the house-elves' psyche--they offer no support to Winky, they disapprove of Dobby's arrangement, and they'd much rather nobody discusses it. What if it is in the nature of the house-elves to prefer the situation the way it is? Is Hermione attempting to impose her morality upon a totally different society with different values? > And what of the status of goblins? I don't think that their role in > the wizarding society has been as clearly defined as the house-elves' > role has been, but we do hear of the goblin rebellions, and we know > that goblins seem relegated exclusively to jobs dealing with money. > The goblins are money-lenders: they run the bank, and the loan money > to Ludo Bagman. Aha. My husband has a theory that the goblins will be key in some major action in future books. We've heard about goblin rebellions and wars so much that it's become background noise, the stuff of sleepy history classes. We have been led to believe they are harmless now. But the goblins have a long history of conflict--what, exactly, were they *rebelling* against? Clearly they can be dangerous. And there is one, count 'em, *one* wizarding bank run by these beings. They seem as amoral as Swiss bankers, in that they carried out a transaction for Sirius Black when he was the most wanted wizard in the world. What would happen if Voldemort managed to win over the goblins? And controlled all the money in the wizarding world? My husband thinks Voldemort will, indeed, get the goblins as allies, but will underestimate them and they'll turn on him. Probably not, though--economics is terribly effective in the real world but not a zinger of a way to defeat a Dark Lord. > On the other hand, asking *why* certain characters are obsessed about > heritage allows us to think critically about the cultural beliefs of > the wizarding world. You must define "obsession." Ron, especially, serves as the voice of the wizarding world to Harry, and many of his prejudices are, as you noted, learned and are discarded when proven inaccurate. Not all of the characters who discuss lineage and heritage are obsessed by it. And a question--when a prejudice is valid, is it still prejudice? I can completely understand the parents withdrawing their children if Lupin remained at Hogwarts; he represents a real danger. If I don't want my child exposed to a werewolf, am I prejudiced? Does motive count? I.e., am I prejudiced if I don't want him exposed because Werewolves Are Evil, and am I not prejudiced if I don't want him exposed because it's dangerous? My point here is that "prejudice" is becoming a knee-jerk Bad Term, and I think it is another of the blanket generalities that JKR shows us the greys in. --Amanda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 06:05:16 2001 From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 06:05:16 -0000 Subject: School houses and Dark Wizards In-Reply-To: <3C09A491.A85BE591@texas.net> Message-ID: <9ucgas+9eph@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30552 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Amanda Lewanski wrote: > jspotila at y... wrote: > > otherwise. In SS chapter 5 he says, "There's not a single witch or > > wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." > > The list has generally taken this comment of Hagrid's to be exaggeration > for emphasis. Another quote which modifies this one is from CS5: For a few horrible seconds he had feared that the hat was going to put him in Slytherin, the house that had turned out more Dark witches and wizards than any other--but he had ended up in Gryffindor, along with Ron, Hermione, and the rest of the Weasleys. Hagrid was exaggerating, certainly, but Slytherin's reputation is well-earned. I wonder what would have become of Harry and the whole Harry vs. Voldemort thing if Harry has been sorted in to Slytherin? Would he have turned out good? I think that Harris's reaction in the film when Harry went up to put on the hat showed the worry excellently. He leaned forward and actually looked quite concerned. He knew that everything he'd worked for hinged on Harry's choice at this point, but he didn't interfere. After all, it had to be Harry's choice to be in Gryffindor, no one elses. Steve (musing late at night while listening to the music from Il Postino and sipping schnapps...ahhhh) From philnel at ksu.edu Sun Dec 2 04:51:17 2001 From: philnel at ksu.edu (Philip Nel) Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 22:51:17 -0600 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods References: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C09B345.D79EDF64@ksu.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30553 Dear all, Amanda Lewanski mentions that there "was a spirited debate a while back, on whether the house-elves" are satisfied with their status. So, first of all, sorry for venturing into well-traveled territory. And, second, for any who do not wish to revisit said territory, please skip the rest of this paragraph. Amanda asks, "What if it is in the nature of the house-elves to prefer the situation the way it is? Is Hermione attempting to impose her morality upon a totally different society with different values?" The answer to the second question is yes: Rowling is satirizing Hermione's zeal. She's making fun of people who, though they mean well, do not understand those whom they wish to help. The answer to the first question is not as clear. Hermione suggests that the elves have been brainwashed. Inasmuch as Rowling does show prejudice as a learned condition, I'm willing to believe that the house-elves have absorbed the notion that enslavement is their lot in life. In other words, their sense of inferiority is learned, too. On the other hand, Rowling does not make apparent the processes by which the house-elves come to think as they do; if they have learned this sense of inferiority, she never shows us. So, while I'm inclined to argue that they've learned to think of themselves as lesser beings, I don't think I can make as convincing a case as I would like to. > > And what of the status of goblins? I don't think that their role in > > the wizarding society has been as clearly defined as the house-elves' > > role has been, but we do hear of the goblin rebellions, and we know > > that goblins seem relegated exclusively to jobs dealing with money. > > The goblins are money-lenders: they run the bank, and they loan money > > to Ludo Bagman. > > Aha. My husband has a theory that the goblins will be key in some major > action in future books. We've heard about goblin rebellions and wars so > much that it's become background noise, the stuff of sleepy history > classes. We have been led to believe they are harmless now. But the > goblins have a long history of conflict--what, exactly, were they > *rebelling* against? Clearly they can be dangerous. And there is one, > count 'em, *one* wizarding bank run by these beings. They seem as amoral > as Swiss bankers, in that they carried out a transaction for Sirius > Black when he was the most wanted wizard in the world. What would happen > if Voldemort managed to win over the goblins? And controlled all the > money in the wizarding world? My husband thinks Voldemort will, indeed, > get the goblins as allies, but will underestimate them and they'll turn > on him. Like Amanda's husband, I, too, suspect that the goblins -- and the house-elves -- will play crucial roles in future books. As to what the goblins are rebelling against, I was inferring that goblins are permitted to work only in certain areas of the wizarding world. That is, they seem to be relegated to particular professions -- money-lending, primarily. I'm not an expert on the history of Jews in Europe, but there seems to be a parallel between the goblins' status and the status of Jews in Europe during certain periods of history (I'm inclined to say the 17th and 18th centuries, but I could well be wrong). So, I would imagine that the goblins have legitimate reasons to rebel against their liminal status. > You must define "obsession." Ron, especially, serves as the voice of the > wizarding world to Harry, and many of his prejudices are, as you noted, > learned and are discarded when proven inaccurate. Not all of the > characters who discuss lineage and heritage are obsessed by it. I am using the term obsession to refer to a persistent fixation. It is true that that not all characters who discuss heritage manifest an obsession with such issues. Nonetheless, most people's interest in heritage or lineage remains invisible, unseen most of the time. Malfoy displays his racism and classism openly, but Ron's beliefs about giants only emerge publicly during the scene I mentioned earlier. > And a question--when a prejudice is valid, is it still prejudice? I can > completely understand the parents withdrawing their children if Lupin > remained at Hogwarts; he represents a real danger. If I don't want my > child exposed to a werewolf, am I prejudiced? Does motive count? I.e., > am I prejudiced if I don't want him exposed because Werewolves Are Evil, > and am I not prejudiced if I don't want him exposed because it's > dangerous? My point here is that "prejudice" is becoming a knee-jerk Bad > Term, and I think it is another of the blanket generalities that JKR > shows us the greys in. By definition, a prejudice is not justified. The word means to judge beforehand, to judge without knowledge. Best regards, Phil Nel -- Philip Nel Assistant Professor Department of English Denison Hall Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506-0701 U.S.A. ----------------------------------------- http://www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/ philnel at ksu.edu From liquidfire at mindgate.net Sun Dec 2 06:08:06 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:08:06 +0800 Subject: physical shortcomings, Dudley as the heir of Gryffindor, Dementor's kiss, Ravenclaws, LV's patronus, my 2 cents on the giant squid Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011202140806.007a7980@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30554 Catlady wrote: >That's what I kept saying, until someone suggested that the eyeglasses aren't really for myopia but have deep magical purposes and that all the characters with eyeglasses are Gryffindors. I haven't checked on the latter statement. I also think that magic also ought to be able to cure obesity and baldness, but the books are full of dumpy and/or balding characters. Let's just say that if magic in the Potterverse was a cure-all, everybody would look like Gilderoy Lockhart. Or any supermodel, for that matter. David wrote: >Several people speculated that Lily Evans was a descendent of Gryffindor. I have no real view on this theory (except to note that JKR is generally anti the significance of physical descent), but it does raise an interesting possibility in a future book: "The door burst open, and a huge figure was framed against the sudden glare. It knocked Pettigrew to the ground with a single blow, saying 'They thought they could conquer me, Dudley Dursley, in whose veins runs the blood of Godric Gryffindor himself.'" Who knows? Anything can happen in the Potterverse, as far as I know. But think about it: Dudley Dursley, spoiled brat extraordinaire, a wizard? Run for cover. rucham78 wrote: >Has it ever been mentioned in canon what happens to the witch or wizard who has been kissed by a Dementor? Yes, Lupin tells Harry that much in PoA, during one of their talks. The soul is sucked out of the person in question. The person continues to exist, as you don't need a soul to govern bodily functions, but he/she is now a vegetable. Sort of being brain-dead, in medical terms. Linnet wrote: >It's really the invisible house (Ravenclaw), isn't it? We don't know who the head of the house is (Prof. Vector??). Nope, it's Professor Flitwick, unless I'm mistaken. Elizabeth wrote: > Really? You think V. has *happy* thoughts? I gotta agree with Cindy here. We have to remember that happiness is objective, an intangible that differs from person to person. Although there is a number of accepted stuff and events that can make a person happy, it does not follow that all those can make everybody happy. For example, I give a sack of rice to a rich family. They'd appreciate the gesture, maybe. Or they might even laugh at me for giving them such a paltry gift. Now give the same sack of rice to a starving family holed up in a refugee camp. How do you think THEY'D react? --- There has been some talk about the giant squid killing Hagrid in OoP. Frankly, I don't believe that the squid is harmful, seems to be a bit like Fang and Hagrid, you know. Scary on the outside, a real sweetie on the inside. Besides, stating that the squid discriminates between children and adults, as Cindy stated, is kinda pushing it, no offense. Either the creature in question is docile (Fang) or its not (Aragog, Creature of Slytherin). I think a creature would need a bigger brain to be more complex in its actions. --- To Catlady, that was a beautiful discussion you just gave us on the whole linage issue. From sayruhbeff at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 06:32:39 2001 From: sayruhbeff at yahoo.com (sayruhbeff at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 06:32:39 -0000 Subject: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uchu7+v4du@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30555 devika wrote: <<>> Alas, I agree, but I have a strong feeling that the opposite may well be true. JKR, in an interview, stated that there was definately going to be a female DADA teacher in the future. (one of the reference interviews off of the HP Lexicon) I can't help but hope that she'll be cool (good feminist message) and that the evil woman will be someone else. Christine breen wrote: <<>> I think this may be referring to Mrs. Lestrange. She stated in the pensieve that LV would release them as soon as he regained power and reward them greatly. Also, LV references the big gap of DEs as his faithful servants who did not deny him. (Strangely Christ-like {Peter and the three denials...hrmm}) I have a feeling that if Fudge doesn't get rid of the Dementors and keep them from allying themselves with LV, they'll be convinced to release the DEs in Azkaban and, well, that gives me the cobblywobbles. *shiver* Do they have muggle Patronus protection systems to put into a home security system? -sarahbeth From jmyers at sunflower.com Sun Dec 2 07:17:54 2001 From: jmyers at sunflower.com (jmyers at sunflower.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 07:17:54 -0000 Subject: Wizard attitudes towards Muggles In-Reply-To: <00d101c17ab6$3b882820$dec71bce@hppav> Message-ID: <9uckj2+9027@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30556 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Eric Oppen" wrote: While I understand your feelings, I ended up feeling quite differently after having read the books. If anyone is interested, here are my thoughts on it. > > It occurs to me that acts such as Arthur Weasley's Muggle > Protection Act might not be motivated by pure, > disinterested love of us Muggles. Instead, down deep, > Arthur W. could be just as prejudiced against Muggles as > Lucius Malfoy, but just express it differently, even to > himself. Instead of "those Muggles are scum, we should > get rid of or enslave them," it might be more along the > lines of "oh, those poor Muggles---they could never, ever > handle the truth, they're so limited and feeble-minded. > As a wizard, it's my job to keep the truth from them, > just as I would keep a charged wand out of the hands of a > chimpanzee." Hmm. Is that a direct quote of Arthur? I don't remember him saying that. In truth, that really does not sum up the 'protection' that seems (to me) to be implied in the books. I can, perhaps see Arthur saying parts of that, but in another context. More on this below. > Forgive me, but neither attitude really pleases me. I > think myself that many or most Muggles could easily > handle knowing about the existence of the wizarding world > (after all, the Dursleys know, at least---and if _they_ > can handle the knowledge without going mad(der), who > can't?) They say that we work hard to deny the existence > of magic, while at the same time they've got wizards > whose whole _job_ is to modify Muggle memories so that we > don't know it's there. The idea of the memory altering and such is to protect the wizards. The reference to Muggle persecution of wizards and witches in the past is quite prominent in the books. The Dursleys represent this kind of Muggle mindset when they were determined, against James and Lily's wishes, mind you, to 'stamp out this nonsense' in young Harry. The Wizarding World first and foremost seeks to protect itself, both physically and culturally from the Muggle World. Also note a few other points made in the books. First of all, it seems evident to me that quite a bit of rescources are devoted to identifying new Muggle born witches and wizards and inviting them to take schooling. Hermione herself is the daughter of 2 Muggle dentists. Second bit. There are, as you noted below, Muggles who are trusted with the knowledge about the Wizarding World. Hermione's parents. The Dursleys (and Mrs. Dursleys parents when her sister Lily went to Hogwarts). Other Muggle born students also made statements implying that they now knew about it. Based upon that second point, I think that the purpose of the memory charms and all that is to protect witches and wizards from the acts of the mindless mob and the possibility of being deluged with endless demands for magickal solutions to Muggle problems. From all of the activity of the MoM, it seems plain that the Wizarding World takes care of the magical end of things and lets the Muggles take care of their own Muggle end of things. > Although I love all the Weasleys, they do show a lot of > the prejudice of their pure-blood wizard background when > they say things like this. I wonder how Hermione felt (I > think she was around when Arthur was barbering on about > how Muggles just couldn't handle knowing that magic was > out there) since I'm sure that her parents knew where she > went and why and what she was studying. In fact, I think > that now that Lord V is back, she's probably had to tell > them things that might disquiet them. "_This_ is safe > enough to do, and so is _this,_ and so is _this._ On the > other hand, _that_ is very dangerous...and, for Heaven's > sake, if someone calling himself 'Tom Riddle,' 'The Dark > Lord,' 'Lord Voldemort,' or 'He Who Must Not Be Named,' > rings and asks for me---I'm in New Zealand and you don't > know when I'll be back!" Just by being her parents, they > are in the line of fire and have a right to know what's > going on. Most certainly, anyone in conflict with the Dark Side should (and does, I imagine) take precautions regarding their loved ones. I do disagree with the assumption that Hermione would be offended. I think that for Mr. Joe Muggle-onthe-street, she agrees. > It would be interesting if Lord V's downfall came from > underestimating Muggles, or the talents of a Muggle-born > like Hermione, wouldn't it? It is reasonable to expect that Hermione will continue to aid Harry, and in doing so be a part of taking him down. Go Hermione! :-) I too am eager to see Hermione 'break bad' and use her considerable talents to take down a baddie. If it is one that has underestimated her (like Lucius M.), so much the better! Regarding the Muggle Protection Act, I always gathered that it was a stiffer prohibition against tormenting, torturing, and abusing them. Arthur's fascination with Muggle ways and his open admiration for the accomplishments of the Muggles does not sound like a fellow who is anti-Muggle... to me anyway. Also keep in mind that although the Weasleys' disapprove of the Dursley's treament of Harry, they have never been hateful or even condescending. Arthur, following the 'floo powder incident' in the Dursley's fireplace, did not wipe their memories (neither did the MoM following the 'inflated aunt episode'). Instead he attempted diplomacy. Arthur's job deals with dangerously enchanted Muggle artifacts. Dangerous either because the might fall into untrustworthy Muggle hands or because of their nature. The fact that he seeks, as his risky hobby, to merge Wizardry and Muggle technology would seem to imply that he is actually pro Muggle-Wizard openness/merging, at least if done carefully and properly. Ah, Harry Potter, so much to love and so much to ponder. Heheh.. If you slogged through all this, thanks for allowing me to share my thoughts with you. -Jerry Myers From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it Sun Dec 2 10:07:22 2001 From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:07:22 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Eagle owls In-Reply-To: <9u8f4k+d9p9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011202100722.92249.qmail@web14708.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30557 Amy Z wrote: Message-ID: <9ud2qj+qu4r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30558 Susanna/pigwidgeon37 wrote: > the Eagle Owl Harry sees while Hagrid is digging *must* be the one carrying the letter to Moody/Crouch which informs him about Crouch Sr.'s escape. So I think there's good reason to see the red lights going on whenever an Eagle Owls turns up. I hate to quibble with anyone who agrees with me on eagle owls, but the dates don't work quite right for the letter about Crouch Sr. In GF 35, Crouch Jr. says "My master sent me word of my father's escape . . . . For a week I waited for my father to arrive at Hogwarts. At last, one evening, the map showed my father entering the grounds," and it was that evening that he killed him. So, about a week between the letter (or however he received word) and the murder. But here's the chronology in GF 27 and 28, with copious evidence that there is well over a month between the eagle owl Harry sees from the Owlery and the death of Crouch Sr: (27) Sirius's owl arrives in March (not absolutely conclusive but almost so), asking Harry to meet him at the stile "Saturday." (28) "Harry, Ron and Hermione went up to the Owlery after breakfast on Sunday," surely the next day or else it would have been described as "one Sunday" or "the next week." They go down to the kitchens, Ron and Hermione bicker for the rest of the day, and Harry goes up to the Owlery on his own to get a break from them. Harry sees the eagle owl while watching Hagrid from the Owlery. "Next day" Hermione receives her lovely missive filled with bubotuber pus. "Over the following week" she continues to receive hate mail. This would seem to bring us up to just about the date Crouch Sr. arrives. But read on: After their "next Defense Against the Dark Arts lesson" Hermione talks about trying to find out how Rita's getting her information. "Hermione, however, did not ask Harry and Ron to help her pursue vengeance against Rita Skeeter, for which they were both grateful, because their workload was mounting ever higher in the run-up to the Easter holidays." "Hedwig didn't return until the end of the Easter holidays." I don't know exactly when the Easter holidays are nor how long they are, and the time that elapses is uncertain from this point, but "in the last week of May, Professor McGonagall held [Harry] back in Transfiguration" and told him to meet Bagman and the other champions on the Quidditch field that night. So Crouch Sr. doesn't show up until after the Easter holidays, and we have further confirmation that he arrives in the last week of May. Whatever the eagle owl was up to the evening Harry stood alone in the Owlery (and I'm sure it was nothing good ), it wasn't delivering the news that Crouch Sr. had escaped. It was just way too early. Amy Z --------------------------------------------- His immediate reaction was that it would be worth becoming a prefect just to be able to use this bathroom. -HP and the Goblet of Fire --------------------------------------------- From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 12:42:36 2001 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 12:42:36 -0000 Subject: Anti-Muggleborn prejudice (was Mudbloods and Marriage) In-Reply-To: <9ubk2v+vaj9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ud7js+amm6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30559 Cindy C:"Given that wizards are apparently attempting to avoid detection by muggles, and given that wizards generally believe themselves somewhat superior to muggles, I am frankly surprised that wizards are allowed to marry muggles." The point has been made (by Ron, for one) that the wizard world would have died out if there hadn't been for Muggle-wizard marriage; so prejudice is an anti-survival trait. That's why, perhaps, it hasn't been outlawed. Cindy:"Perhaps we can conclude from the lack of marital restrictions that wizards have their biases and prejudices, but perhaps their biases are not so deeply held as those found in Muggle history because wizards don't restrict the fundamental right to choose a suitable mate." I'm a little surprised also. It's the `species' survival thing again, I expect, or perhaps that Muggle-wizard couples don't have to advertise their status to those who don't know. (That's what's so pernicious about the various racial prejudices - you can tell the members apart at a glance.) Consider this as well: the Hogwarts experience brings them all together, where they may not know each other's status. (Is Lee Jordan pureblood? Ernie MacMillan? Lavender Brown? We don't know, and they don't have to say.) They fall in love. If Hogwarts didn't admit Muggle-borns, the wizarding world would quickly become even more isolated.) I can see many opportunities for jealousy against Muggle-born wizards. Take Harry and Hermione as examples. They can move in two worlds - ours and the wizarding one. Ron can't. He had trouble figuring out a telephone, and if you dropped him in the middle of London without his wand he'd be in a fix. There's likely to be envy against those who can "cross over," disguised by holding that ability to be the mark of untrustworthiness or disloyalty to the wizard world. OTOH, you can probably tell the Muggle-borns apart by their clothes or hair, at least. Harry and Hermione probably don't change their mode of dress that much, although they could change if they wished. It's a difference the prejudiced can point at. I doubt Harry's going to buy a purple top hat anytime soon. Prof. Nel [visiting professor of Muggle Studies at Hogwarts]:"Rowling understands that prejudice is insidious, subtle, and easily fed by rumor. Not only do powerful people harbor prejudices but the apparently "good" characters hold many unexamined assumptions about certain "types." So, it's true that Rowling is condemning racism, but she's also saying that racism is not the exclusive province of the "bad guys." Once again, Rowling is presenting an important point with subtlety not seen in "children's" literature. She's showing us how universal prejudice is, the dark side in all humans, and thereby also underlining the humanity of wizards. She's doing the same with the class system, including that just because one of the "lower classes" (house elves) are used to their station in life, that doesn't make it okay. From crowswolf at sympatico.ca Sun Dec 2 13:48:47 2001 From: crowswolf at sympatico.ca (Jamieson Wolf Villeneuve) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:48:47 -0000 Subject: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: <9uchu7+v4du@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udbfv+r33r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30560 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., sayruhbeff at y... wrote: \ > Alas, I agree, but I have a strong feeling that the opposite may well > be true. JKR, in an interview, stated that there was definately > going to be a female DADA teacher in the future. (one of the > reference interviews off of the HP Lexicon) I can't help but hope > that she'll be cool (good feminist message) and that the evil woman > will be someone else. > I happen to agree with this too. It would be about time to see an evil female character, but think of the possibilities. Voldemort (GASP!) has come back from the dead. Surely, with that in mind, there will be a way in for many new evil characters. Among them, women. I really hope that the next DADA teacher is a woman. It would be so neat! I mean, all we've had thus far is male DADA teachers. It would be wonderful to get a femail standpoint in that class. Jamieson From Joanne0012 at aol.com Sun Dec 2 13:49:36 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:49:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9ubq38+2r10@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udbhg+rqa1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30561 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote: > I am new to this list, so forgive me if this topic has come up > before... > It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with the > Dursley's, to love and to trust. I would argue that his treatment by > the Dursleys borders on child abuse--psychological, emotional, and > physical (when Dursley grabs Harry and is yelling at him). Certainly > Harry is reticent when it comes to showing emotion (seems like I read > somewhere that that is a hallmark of abused childen) but has JKR ever > commented on the fact of Harry's abuse? Yes, she has. She sid "I feel sorry for Dudley. I might joke about him, but I feel truly sorry for him because I see him as just as abused as Harry. Though, in possibly a less obvious way," in an interview about a year ago. http://www.cinescape.com/0/Editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Books&action= page&obj_id=25917 There's no doubt in my mind that Harry has been abused -- put in the cupboard despite there being plenty of room, and being locked in there and deprived of food in exchange for misbehavior. Being literally treated as a nonperson when the Dursleys have dinner guests, etc. Harry does act like an emotionally abused kid, hiding his emotional reactions and constantly doubting his own value. His coping does, however, seem to be like kids who are described as "resilient," they are true Stoics, with an inner life and confidence that they manage to hide, but which enables them to blossom once they're released. We have seen how Harry eventually learns to stand up to the Dursleys; in the beginning of PoA, when he negotiates with Vernon about getting his Hogsmeade permission form signed in exchanged for behaving around Aunt Marge. From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 14:27:21 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:27:21 -0000 Subject: After the KISS In-Reply-To: <9uc2jq+krac@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uddo9+amcf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30562 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., clarinut76 at y... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., rucham78 at y... wrote: > > Has it ever been mentioned in canon what happens to the witch or > > wizard who has been kissed by a Dementor? I know that the soul is > > kissed, but does the witch remain alive? Can this witch then > function > > as a magic person? So you think s/he can talk/walk/so magic after > > being kissed, or do they become vegetables? [Are they taken to St. > > Mungo's and killed, like pulling the plug on someone who is alive > > only by virtue of respirator?] > > It is dreadful to be KISSED as I gather from canon, but can one go > > back and learn about magic? Become a magic person again? > > Any thoughts? > > Rucha > > I'm new here, but it is my understanding that once a witch or wizard > is kissed by a dementor, they live, but they only exist. They have > no powers, no memory, no nothing. I highly doubt that after being > kissed that a person can go back and re-learn about being magic. > Lupin says in the third book that they only exist. No sense of self, > no nothing. > > Rachel The victims of the dementors appear to become the opposite of ghosts. Ghosts are "departed," ie Dead-But-Not-Gone, victims are "demented," or Gone-But-Not-Dead. (And then of course there are the more populous categories of "Dead-And-Gone" and the ever popular "Not-Dead-And-Not-Gone.") -- Heather (uma) Ringmistress of the Potterverse Metaphysical Circus (Enjoy the prime rib! We're here through Thursday...) From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 14:32:16 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:32:16 -0000 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods In-Reply-To: <3C09B345.D79EDF64@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ude1g+86n8@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30563 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Philip Nel wrote: > By definition, a prejudice is not justified. The word means to judge beforehand, to judge without knowledge. > > Best regards, > > Phil Nel > -- Ah ha, well, now we're teetering into the realms of value clarification and the sticky problem of connotation vs denotation. As such is off-topic, I'll merely point out that semantic definitions *don't,* IMO, dictate the relative social/moral value. "Justified" is a bit of a loaded term here. -- Heather (uma) From witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 14:47:32 2001 From: witchwanda2002 at yahoo.com (Wanda Mallett) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 06:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: <9udbfv+r33r@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011202144732.19900.qmail@web13706.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30564 You busy Witch you! Read your posts to HPfGUs. They changed some rules of posting because of the many newbies and horrible mistakes! Check out the main page of HPFGU's or even ask Sheryll! They are really checking the grammar! More work, but it helps! So, does this mean I get more email from you too? It is really good to see your name among all the HPFGU posts! Well, it was where I met you! Check out my response to your post! What time to you work to today? So, you won't be so bored, tosend a post here and there for you. Does Geoffery have a computer? If so, maybe he can email you too at work! To bad cats can't read and type. Then Mauve can really keep you busy! There is a kid's story there for you! My stooges are waking up! So much for quiet time! Will email you later. Love and Hugs, Witchy Wanda here in the South --- Jamieson Wolf Villeneuve wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., sayruhbeff at y... wrote: > \ > > Alas, I agree, but I have a strong feeling that > the opposite may > well > > be true. JKR, in an interview, stated that there > was definately > > going to be a female DADA teacher in the future. > (one of the > > reference interviews off of the HP Lexicon) I > can't help but hope > > that she'll be cool (good feminist message) and > that the evil woman > > will be someone else. > > > > I happen to agree with this too. It would be about > time to see an evil > female character, but think of the possibilities. > Voldemort (GASP!) > has come back from the dead. Surely, with that in > mind, there will be > a way in for many new evil characters. Among them, > women. > > I really hope that the next DADA teacher is a woman. > It would be so > neat! I mean, all we've had thus far is male DADA > teachers. It would > be wonderful to get a femail standpoint in that > class. > > Jamieson > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From editor at texas.net Sun Dec 2 14:48:56 2001 From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 08:48:56 -0600 Subject: No criticism intended, was Elves, goblins, etc. References: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> <3C09B345.D79EDF64@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <3C0A3F57.D87114FB@texas.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30565 Philip Nel wrote: > Amanda Lewanski mentions that there "was a spirited debate a while > back, on whether the house-elves" are satisfied with their status. > So, first of all, sorry for venturing into well-traveled territory. No, no, no, nothing of that was intended. If the discussion in question was more than, say, two weeks ago, a creditable number of list members may not have been around for it. This was not meant as a criticism, but to let you know that there's been discussion on this, if you're interested enough to comb the archives a bit. That's generally why previous discussions on various topics are pointed out--to let the discusser(s) know there may be grist for the mill in the archives. --Amanda, kids are waking up, will read the rest of your response post in detail later, honest, if they get to bed early tonight [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heath143harry at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 14:59:27 2001 From: heath143harry at yahoo.com (heath143harry at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:59:27 -0000 Subject: Flesh, Skin, Bone? (was Gleam in Dumbledore's eyes) In-Reply-To: <9ubrl5+4i6s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udfkf+6t55@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30566 Amy Z said > OK, to your point. If it's Harry's skin that's effective, not his > blood, then why can Voldemort touch him now? He hasn't done >anything with Harry's skin. Well to respond to this, when Voldemort cut his arm to get the blood, he was also going to get a little bit of Harry's skin with that. He opened up Harry's skin to get the blood, and maybe that is the reason his mother's protection has gone..... Does that make any sense? :) Although, I agree with the other theories and certainly don't think Dumbledore is evil or anything, so I'm not sure how my little theory here would fit in! Heather From heath143harry at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 15:19:18 2001 From: heath143harry at yahoo.com (heath143harry at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:19:18 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Message-ID: <9udgpm+ap35@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30567 I'm not at all sure if I'm being terribly repetitive (I am new to these forums and haven't much time to check all the back posts I have been wanting to), but the students I have for being in Ravenclaw are: Cho Chang Roger Davies Penelope Clearwater Terry Boot Mandy Brocklehurst Fawcett, S. Lisa Turpin Padma Patil Stewart Ackerley Orla Quirke All of whom after Penelope Clearwater were mentioned in a sorting ceremony. :) Heather From cindysphynx at home.com Sun Dec 2 15:44:49 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:44:49 -0000 Subject: Timing of Crouch's escape (was Eagle owls) In-Reply-To: <9ud2qj+qu4r@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udi9h+gjp0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30568 Amy wrote: I'm not following you guys. Why are we sure that the eagle owl is arriving with a message instead of being sent to deliver a message? The text is: "An eagle owl flew through the coil of smoke rising from Hagrid's chimney; it soared toward the castle, around the Owlery, and out of sight." Yes, the owl could have gone into the Owlery or castle after it flew out of sight. But if it were delivering a message to someone in the castle, wouldn't it deliver the message right away and go straight into the castle without the detour around the Owlery? If it were going to rest in the Owlery first and then deliver the message in the morning, why doesn't it go straight into the Owlery? If the owl is in fact being sent from the grounds to deliver a message, who sent it and what's the message? Hard to say. The events right before the appearance of the eagle owl are (working backward): Conversation with Dobby and Winky in the kitchens Visit with Sirius in the cave Karkaroff showing Snape his Dark Mark in Potions class Harry's performance in the Second Task Is Karkaroff sending an owl to someone about the appearance of the dark mark on his arm? Doesn't seem likely. Is Moody sending an owl to Voldemort informing him that Harry survivied the Second Task? That makes some sense, although I am unsure how many days pass between the completion of the Second Task and the eagle owl's appearance. Can we find a way to implicate Bagman? Cindy (expecting to be shot down by something really obvious that she missed) From cindysphynx at home.com Sun Dec 2 15:55:45 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:55:45 -0000 Subject: Anti-Muggleborn prejudice (was Mudbloods and Marriage) In-Reply-To: <9ud7js+amm6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udiu1+8ssf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30569 Jim (responding to Professor Phil in his Endowed Muggle Chair) wrote: > Once again, Rowling is presenting an important point with subtlety > not seen in "children's" literature. She's showing us how universal > prejudice is, the dark side in all humans, and thereby also > underlining the humanity of wizards. She's doing the same with the > class system, including that just because one of the "lower classes" > (house elves) are used to their station in life, that doesn't make it > okay. Yes, we've seen lots of prejudice in the wizarding world, and it's not pretty. But is it universal in the wizarding world? Harry seems to harbor no prejudice, but he might actually be alone in this. Even Dumbledore shows us something that could be construed as prejudice. He doesn't like or trust the dementors. Not just some dementors; all dementors. For some reason, I'm inclined to think this is something other than prejudice, but I can't figure out why I feel that way. Maybe as Phil points out, Dumbledore isn't pre- judging the dementors, but he understands their mission and has experience with them sufficient to know how they are used. He isn't wary of dementors per se; he is just wary of the way MoM uses them. Cindy (hoping Phil understands she is just teasing about the Muggle Chair thing) From ceo at shore.net Sun Dec 2 15:50:45 2001 From: ceo at shore.net (Chip Olson) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:50:45 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9udbhg+rqa1@eGroups.com>; from Joanne0012@aol.com on Sun, Dec 02, 2001 at 01:49:36PM -0000 References: <9ubq38+2r10@eGroups.com> <9udbhg+rqa1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011202105045.A16448@shore.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30570 Quoth Joanne0012 at aol.com: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote: > > It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with the > > Dursley's, to love and to trust. > Harry does act like an emotionally abused kid, hiding his emotional reactions > and constantly doubting his own value. His coping does, however, seem to be > like kids who are described as "resilient," they are true Stoics, with an inner > life and confidence that they manage to hide, but which enables them to > blossom once they're released. My wife, who studied the effects and implications of childhood trauma very intensively in graduate school, has commented that Harry's level of coping and social adjustment is far, far higher than could be expected from someone with that kind of upbringing, to the point of being utterly unrealistic. She would have expected him to develop into a complete sociopath (and she is *very* much not the sort to underestimate the resilience of the human psyche). -- -Chip Olson. | ceo at shore dot net "Here comes the sun, doo-doo-doo-doo, Here comes the sun, I say, It's all right..." -George Harrison 1943-2001. I resent having ads attached to my messages. From heath143harry at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 16:14:08 2001 From: heath143harry at yahoo.com (heath143harry at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:14:08 -0000 Subject: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9ubq38+2r10@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udk0g+7sej@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30571 nancyaw2001 said Harry is an amazing kid. There's one bit in PofA, when > Harry tells Lupin that he hears V. murdering his mother, that makes > me just want to grab him, hold him tight, and let him know that > someone cares about him, and that he's deserving of love. > > Or maybe it just hit a nerve with me. I totally agree! In SS when Harry is looking into the Mirror of Erised; he sees his family and lets a small "Mom? Dad?" which absolutely broke my heart into a 1,000 pieces. But I think that Harry has always felt love from Mrs. Weasley, this is particularly evident in The Parting of Ways chapter in GoF. If Harry cannot have his own parents to be there and constantly provide him with love, I can think of no one better than Mrs. Weasley to do that job. :) Heather From heidit at netbox.com Sun Dec 2 17:11:10 2001 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 12:11:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9udk0g+7sej@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <000001c17b54$575397d0$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem> No: HPFGUIDX 30572 nancyaw2001 said > Harry is an amazing kid. There's one bit in PofA, when > > Harry tells Lupin that he hears V. murdering his mother, that makes > > me just want to grab him, hold him tight, and let him know that > > someone cares about him, and that he's deserving of love. > > I'm going into the WayBack machine for my response to this - all the way to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/828 (message 828. Gack!) Way way back in September, 2000, this list had its first of many varied and insightful discussions about abuse - and I chirped up with some comments (linked to above) about resiliant children - the concept of a resiliant child is one who has multiple and severe risks in their lives but can nonetheless develop into "confident, competent, and caring" teens and adults. Resiliant children have certain characteristics/outside support factors (see the bottom of this post) which have been studied by experts like Marty Seligman, who wrote a treatise on this in the early 1990's The presence of at least one caring person--someone who conveys an attitude of compassion, who understands that no matter how awful a child's behavior, the child is doing the best he or she can given his or her experience--provides support for healthy development and learning. This person can be a parent who was in a child's life at one point, but later was separated from the child. Even a permannent separation at a young age (between twelve and 18 months) can provide this "caring person" support factor, because the toddler has memories of the parent and the loving environment, which stay in the child's subconscious, and even in the conscious mind, longer than a lay adult would suspect. Studies show that three and four year olds can remember being a year old, and the things they did or played with, or the people they knew. Even if a six or seven year old cannot concretely remember actions and playmates from when they were five years younger, those memories have become part of their subconscious. It's easy and reasonable to assume that for his first 15 months, Harry had a terrificly stable upbringing, great, loving parents (ok, maybe James spent time away from home on anti-voldemort things...) and a lot of love at home. Then, tragically, things go wrong. We next see him almost ten years later, sleeping in a cuboard, but able to "visit" the rest of the house. And he's not horrible. Why? Is it the whole Cinderella thing, where she's just so inherently good that the horribleness of her situation doesn't reduce her unfailing goodness? Possibly - I mean, this part of the story is the closest to traditional fairy tales (but then again, in the traditional Perrault and Grimm cinderella stories, she had her father until he was somewhere between 5 and 9) - but there might be another explanation. My pet theory is that even if he doesn't remember it, Harry's magical abilities allowed him to "improve" things in the cuboard until his memories of his parents & his prior "life" started to fade away. Babies remember things - you spend enough time with a 13 or 15 month old, and you see that even if they haven't done something or played with a toy or seen a book for 2, 3, even 4 months, they'll remember it when they see it. They're generally walking and talking, and unless Hagrid gave him a little sleeping draught, Harry was a pretty good sleeper at 15 months. And if they have the personality for it, babies play on their own better than they play with others. And if you're a wizard baby, and you're spending every night in a crib in a dark room, you'll amuse yourself by making the nightlight flash on & off, by sending your blanket flying around the room, by climbing out ofthe crib (yes, at that age, they do!) and going into the box of old toys of Dudley's and playing with them. Even if 10 year old harry has no memories of his parents, 3, and maybe even 4 year old Harry did - and that probably helped a lot with keeping him on a more even keel than he would've been if his parents had been killed when he was, say, 3 months old. This discussion, btw, was what made me initially start thinking about Draco's homelife (which turned into my fanfic, Surfeit of Curses, available at Schnoogle.com under my name) where Draco's resiliance is, well, not so good, in part because, unlike Harry, Draco (in my universe) has never had unconditionally loving, attached parents whereas Harry did. And now....... The Factors: Social competence includes qualities such as responsiveness, especially the ability to elicit positive responses from others; flexibility, including the ability to move between different cultures; empathy; communication skills; and a sense of humor. Problem-solving skills encompass the ability to plan; to be resourceful in seeking help from others; and to think critically, creatively, and reflectively. In the development of a critical consciousness, a reflective awareness of the structures of oppression (be it from an alcoholic parent, an insensitive school, or a racist society) and creating strategies for overcoming them has been key. Autonomy is having a sense of one's own identity and an ability to act independently and to exert some control over one's environment, including a sense of task mastery, internal locus of control, and self-efficacy. The development of resistance (refusing to accept negative messages about oneself) and of detachment (distancing oneself from dysfunction) serves as a powerful protector of autonomy. Lastly, resilience is manifested in having a sense of purpose and a belief in a bright future, including goal direction, educational aspirations, achievement motivation, persistence, hopefulness, optimism, and spiritual connectedness. Just some food for thought, to add to the insightful comments already mentioned this week. I do hope Peg comments as well - she's had some excellent insights in the past, which have been shown in her Virtues essays as well. heidi tandy follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes& ships - only 7 sickles an ounce http://www.fictionalley.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From devika at sas.upenn.edu Sun Dec 2 17:13:09 2001 From: devika at sas.upenn.edu (Devika S. Lal) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 12:13:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <20011202105045.A16448@shore.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30573 Chip Olson wrote: <<< My wife, who studied the effects and implications of childhood trauma very intensively in graduate school, has commented that Harry's level of coping and social adjustment is far, far higher than could be expected from someone with that kind of upbringing, to the point of being utterly unrealistic. She would have expected him to develop into a complete sociopath (and she is *very* much not the sort to underestimate the resilience of the human psyche). >>> A sociopath? Like what Tom Riddle became? I'm not arguing with you--I'm certainly not an expert in the effects of childhood trauma. Harry's adjustment may very well be unrealistic. However, I don't think that's the point. I think that we should look at Harry's resilience not as being unrealistic, but as being the complete opposite of Tom Riddle's way of coping with his childhood. I think that this is JKR's way of showing that two people can turn out to be completely different even though they may have had similar childhoods. It all depends on what they want to make of their lives. I wrote a post a while back about this saying that the very similarities between Harry and Tom Riddle--their physical resemblance, their childhood upbringing--just serve to highlight the important differences between them. Tom chose to become Voldemort, while Harry chose to fight Voldemort. Why did JKR bother to form the parallels between Harry and Tom? I think she uses the similarities as a device to prove to us what Dumbledore says: that it is our choices that shape who we truly are and who we become. Devika [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From margdean at erols.com Sun Dec 2 17:58:14 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 12:58:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Elves (again) References: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> <3C09B345.D79EDF64@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <3C0A6BB6.639346F0@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30574 The entry of Professor Nel of the Muggle Studies Dept. (:)) into the discussion on house-elves encourages me to toss out a question that's been sitting in the back of my mind for some time. We've discussed before the fact that we (and Hermione) don't really know a lot about the origins and the various ramifications of the current position of house-elves in wizarding society. I hope we (and she) will find out a lot more about that in subsequent books. But it does occur to me to wonder whether the house-elf situation is more like slavery (which most if not all of us, I suspect, would consider insupportable even at its best, because it denies the full humani-- um, er, let's call it =beinghood= -- of the slave) or more like marriage (which comes in a whole spectrum of forms, ranging from the totally satisfying to the horrifyingly awful). Ask yourself this: if you were a being from another planet, whose culture didn't have marriage in any form (hard to imagine, I know), and came to Earth, and the first Earthling you met was a victim of severe spousal abuse [Dobby], what impression would you get of the institution as a whole? --Margaret Dean From Littlered32773 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 18:00:20 2001 From: Littlered32773 at yahoo.com (Littlered32773 at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 18:00:20 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin Message-ID: <9udq7k+vio4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30575 Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to mid 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? It seems that the other HoH's are much older. We know McGonagall is in her 70's (again interviews) and I don't see Sprout and Flitwick as much younger. Given this, and Snape's murkey past (yes, yes, Dumbledore vouched for him, but he WAS involved with Voldy as far as we know), doesn't it seem odd that he would be a HoH? I get the impression from the books that he's been working at Hogwarts for several years before Harry arrives, though it couldn't be more than 10-12 (if they allow recent grads to work there immediately), so how did he move up to the prestigious HoH so quickly? From margdean at erols.com Sun Dec 2 18:42:34 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:42:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape as Head of Slytherin References: <9udq7k+vio4@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0A761A.76C1B22F@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30576 Littlered32773 at yahoo.com wrote: > > Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to mid > 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to > school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? It seems that > the other HoH's are much older. We know McGonagall is in her 70's > (again interviews) and I don't see Sprout and Flitwick as much > younger. Given this, and Snape's murkey past (yes, yes, Dumbledore > vouched for him, but he WAS involved with Voldy as far as we know), > doesn't it seem odd that he would be a HoH? I get the impression > from the books that he's been working at Hogwarts for several years > before Harry arrives, though it couldn't be more than 10-12 (if they > allow recent grads to work there immediately), so how did he move up > to the prestigious HoH so quickly? Because he's the only one who would take the job? Seriously, it could very well be that the previous Head of Slytherin House was one of the casualties of Voldy War I. Also, Snape might have both Dumbledore and influential former DE's like Malfoy behind his appointment, given his "double agent" status. This could also be a partial explanation of why Snape favors Draco Malfoy, if Lucius helped him get the HoH position. Also why you catch him smirking in CoS when Draco is telling him how he'll get his dad to push for Snape as Headmaster. Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) --Margaret Dean From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 19:28:02 2001 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 19:28:02 -0000 Subject: Anti-Muggleborn prejudice (was Mudbloods and Marriage) In-Reply-To: <9udiu1+8ssf@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udvc2+jnrq@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30577 Cindy:"Yes, we've seen lots of prejudice in the wizarding world, and it's not pretty. But is it universal in the wizarding world? Harry seems to harbor no prejudice, but he might actually be alone in this." Few of us are utterly free of prejudice. There's every reason to suppose prejudice is just as pervasive in the wizard world as anywhere else. Harry's at least a little prejudiced against the Slytherins, isn't he? Cindy:"Even Dumbledore shows us something that could be construed as prejudice. He doesn't like or trust the dementors. Not just some dementors; all dementors. For some reason, I'm inclined to think this is something other than prejudice..." That's not prejudice, that's making an informed distinction, and that's necessary. To do otherwise is the path of relativism and moral cowardice. What virtue is there in a dementor? Would you care to examine your "prejudice" against Nazis or members of the KKK? From catlady at wicca.net Sun Dec 2 19:29:56 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 19:29:56 -0000 Subject: Poltergeist/Ravenclaws/Wiz-Muggle/Magic Eye/sQUID/Looks/resilient abused HP Message-ID: <9udvfk+u2gl@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30578 Hollydaze! wrote (and others expanded): > poltergeist is some sort of spiritual energy, it was never human. > The energy is subconsciously created by teenage girls, especially > those that are depressed or have very strong feelings at the time Not just girls! I believe not even especially girls -- any person in the first few years of puberty who has a lot of repressed sexual energy and repressed resentment against authority figures (now that I type that that, I am surprised that I haven't heard of more polter- geists in prisons). As I understand it, the "spiritual" energy that creates the poltergeist symptoms is primarily sexual energy. Btw P.E.I. Bonewitz mentioned a personal encounter with a poltergeist who hit a person on the head, kind of hard, with a paperweight, when the person said "Poltergeists never actually harm people." Klawsie wrote: > Well, Ravenclaws are supposed to be the very smart ones, right? > What if they're kept seperate so as not to "slow down" their > learning processes? (snip) It's fairer to the other students. Other students like Hermione? It's possible that all Ravenclaws are smart (if it really is picking the students that ol' Rowena would have picked), altho' from the example of Gryffindors, it's also possible that some Ravenclaws just WANT to be smart or just value intelligence as the highest good. But even if all Ravenclaws are smart, not all non-Ravenclaws are non-smart, so it would be more logical to Sort the students into classes by ability than by House if ability was the criterion. I believe that the Gryffindors have Astronomy with the Ravenclaws and that all the classes that Gryffindors and Slytherins have together, Ravenclaws and Hufflepuffs have together. Eric Oppen wrote: > I think myself that many or most Muggles could easily handle > knowing about the existence of the wizarding world (snip) > Although I love all the Weasleys, they do show a lot of the > prejudice of their pure-blood wizard background when they say > things like this. I wonder how Hermione felt I don't agree that "most" Muggles could handle knowing about the wizarding world. Not that we'd go mad or suicidal, but that we would go paranoid. History has shown over and over that cultures who believe in magic that is done by local human beings easily turn against those human beings and blame them for sudden illnesses, injuries, crop failures, and so on, and very often kill them either as normal tit-for-tat vengeance or because they believe that killing them will end the curse that they cast. Here in modern America, those who didn't believe that wizards were agents of Satan or of an invading other planet would feel resentment against wizards having an unfair advantage. Even I would sulk at people who can Apparate, avoid the misery of rush hour, and sleep late every morning! I strongly agree that Arthur's patronizing attitude toward Muggles is a form of bigotry. I strongly disagree that Arthur is AS bigotted as Draco. I feel that Hermione has bought into the wizarding party line on staying hidden from Muggles for the sake of wizarding folk's own safety: perhaps because she is a little bit respectful of authority, she believes that for word of magic to get out to the Muggle media would be harmful to her personally. Jerry Myers wrote: > First of all, it seems evident to me that quite a bit of > rescources are devoted to identifying new Muggle born > witches and wizards and inviting them to take schooling. It is strongly implied that that is done because a few influential people (Dumbledore in this generation) push strongly for it and only a few people (Lucius Malfoy, Salazar Slytherin) push strongly against it, and most don't care enough to push one way or the other, but not caring enough to push against admitting them to Hogwarts doesn't mean being willing to let one join the country club. > Arthur's fascination with Muggle ways and his open admiration for > the accomplishments of the Muggles does not sound like a fellow who > is anti-Muggle When Arthur admires the clever ways that Muggles have dreamt up to get along without magic, he sound patronizing, like admiring how clever a little child is who figures out something that "everyone already knows". He doesn't realize that Muggles have passed wizards: we used to invent technological ways to accomplish what we saw them do by magic (flush toilets, gas lights for their automatic torches on the walls, railway trains for their self-propelled carriages, carrier pigeons for owls) but with the Electricity Age, we got ahead of them and started inventing things they never had, such as telegraph and radio (proof: the name Wizarding Wireless -- radio is called Wireless only because it followed telegraph which was Wire), and now THEY use magic to imitate what WE do with technology. Cindy C wrote: > After all, Harry could just get two magical eyes like Moody. That eye is some powerful magical artifact! I wonder where Moody got it. I wonder if it were made by a human mage, made by a human mage out of special magical materials (like the Invisibility Cloak is made from the fleece of an invisible animals described in FABULOUS BEASTS), or if it is really the eye from a special magical animal transplanted into the human? Hollydaze! wrote: > I always got the impression that the Giant Squid is actually a nice > creature. (snip) The fact that Lee Jordan and the Wealsey twins > -have been said to- tickle it's tentacles. Would you do that with a > dangerous beast? *I* wouldn't. But Lee and the Trickster Twins? Sure they would. Cindy C wrote: > (Help me if I've missed someone who is definitely physically > attractive based on his/her description in the books). Definitely Madam Rosmerta, 'a curvy sort of woman with a pretty face." Possibly Gilderoy Lockhart. Nancy wrote: > It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with > the Dursley's, to love and to trust. and Joanne0012 and Chip and Heidi agreed, bringing up the notion of 'resilience', and Heidi in particular wrote: > The presence of at least one caring person--someone who conveys an > attitude of compassion, who understands that no matter how awful a > child's behavior, the child is doing the best he or she can given > his or her experience--provides support for healthy development and > learning. This person can be a parent who was in a child's life at > one point, but later was separated from the child. Even a permanent > separation at a young age (between twelve and 18 months) can > provide this "caring person" support factor, because the toddler > has memories of the parent and the loving environment, which stay > in the child's subconscious, and even in the conscious mind, longer > than a lay adult would suspect. (snip) > My pet theory is that even if he doesn't remember it, Harry's > magical abilities allowed him to "improve" things in the cuboard > until his memories of his parents & his prior "life" started to > fade away. I'm sure all old-timers are sick of hearing me say it, but *MY* pet theory is that it wasn't Harry's magic, it was Lily's magic. That her last act was not defending herself nor attacking her attacker, that while sheltering baby Harry with her body, she put all her life-energy into magically planting an image of herself into his mind. So that he perceived this image as an 'imaginary Mum', like imaginary friends, but it really had much more reality than the usual imaginary Mum and comforted him when he cried in his cupboard and told him he was a good kid and told him the difference between good and evil (which he would not have learned from the Dursleys) and I don't have any proof, but as evidence I offer that the way Harry learned to resist Imperius was that "a voice in his head" said: "Why should you?" I argue that that voice was what was left of the little model of Lily after all these years. From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sun Dec 2 19:48:26 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:48:26 -0500 Subject: Harry's upbringing References: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0A858A.477209A2@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30579 Nancy wrote: > It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with the > Dursley's, to love and to trust. This was the sense of my first post to the list a while back, as well. Seemed to get a pretty "ho hum" kind of a reaction then. My theory, for what it's worth, is that Lily's "protection" charm protected Harry a bit from the Dursley's abuse, as well... it's a weak theory, but it's the best I can come up with. Though actually, after I wrote that first post, I thought about it for a while and decided that Harry does do a lot of "neglected child" things. He's very independent, doesn't like going to adults for help, and often doesn't tell adults things he probably should. (CoS has good examples of this, and PoA even more. I'm not allowed to discuss the movie here, but there's some interesting threads about Daniel Radcliff's portrayal of an abused and neglected child over there.) So maybe he is a bit more marked than we realize, sometimes. JKR just doesn't drone on about it the way, for example, Mercedes Lackey might. Elizabeth (who regularly reads YA fantasy and science fiction-- because it fits well into her 35-year-old new-mom lifestyle. ;) From pkerr06 at attglobal.net Sun Dec 2 19:18:38 2001 From: pkerr06 at attglobal.net (Peg Kerr) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:18:38 -0600 Subject: Harry's upbringing (LONG) Message-ID: <3C0A7E8E.209EFB46@attglobal.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30580 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Heidi Tandy" wrote: > nancyaw2001 said > > Harry is an amazing kid. There's one bit in PofA, when > > > Harry tells Lupin that he hears V. murdering his mother, that makes > > > me just want to grab him, hold him tight, and let him know that > > > someone cares about him, and that he's deserving of love. > > > > > I'm going into the WayBack machine for my response to this - all the way > to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/828 (message 828. > Gack!) > > Way way back in September, 2000, this list had its first of many varied and insightful discussions about abuse And now....... The Factors: Social competence . . . Problem-solving skills . . . Autonomy . . . The development of resistance and of detachment . . . Lastly, resilience is manifested in having a sense of purpose and a belief in a bright future I do hope Peg comments as well - she's had some excellent insights in the past, which have been shown in her Virtues essays as well. Thanks, Heidi. Good message, and a good message from the archives. I learned so much about the role of the Dursleys in the books from writing the 7 Deadly Sins/7 Heavenly Virtues essays. I don't think I really understood until I did those essays how integral they are to the story, and to the process of Harry's character development. Specifically, the Dursleys are to Harry a warning example of what happens when you allow free rein to your worst impulses (gluttony, pride, sloth, etc.). As I pointed out in one of those essays, this inoculates Harry against temptation by Voldemort: "Want all the money you can have to buy whatever you want, Harry? Power? All the coke you can stuff up your nose?" Harry would reply, "No thanks. I saw what getting whatever you want did to my cousin. Yuck." Conversely, the Dursleys show Harry what it is like to live without each of the 7 Heavenly Virtues. To take the example from my Faith essay: The process of growing in faith is often metaphorically described as the undertaking of a journey. The turning point for Harry in terms of faith takes place at the beginning of his journey to Hogwarts. The Dursleys take Harry to King's Cross Station, moving him through the mundane, muggle world that they know. But because they are both faithless and lack faith, they abandon him. They literally think--and tell him--that he is going nowhere. Now is the point that faith is needed. Harry must be proactive, not just reactive, in order to begin his journey. In order to find out what to do, he turns to a newly introduced character, Mrs. Weasley, to solve his problem, and the encounter is thematically extremely important: "Excuse me," Harry said to the plump woman. "Hello, dear," she said. "First time at Hogwarts? Ron's new, too." She pointed to the last and youngest of her sons. He was tall, thin, and gangling, with freckles, big hands and feet, and a long nose.: "Yes," said Harry. "The thing is -- the think is, I don't know how to --" "How to get onto the platform?" she said kindly, and Harry nodded. "Not to worry," she said, "All you have to do is walk straight at the barrier between platforms nine and ten. Don't stop and don't be scared you'll crash into it, that's very important. Best do it at a bit of a run if you're nervous. Go on, go now before Ron." I think it is significant that Harry perceives Mrs. Weasley first as a mother in this scene. He lost his own mother at a very young age, a very important blow to his moral development because an infant learns the concept of "trust," the first cornerstone of faith, in the course of interacting with his or her own mother. Mrs. Weasley will, over the course of the series, become Harry's surrogate mother, and so it is significant that she is the one to give him the instruction that literally starts him on his faith journey. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Devika S. Lal" wrote: I think that we should look at Harry's resilience not as being > unrealistic, but as being the complete opposite of Tom Riddle's way of coping with his childhood. I think that this is JKR's way of showing that two people can turn out to be completely different even though they may have had similar childhoods. It all depends on what they want to make of their lives. Why did JKR bother to form the parallels between Harry and Tom? I think she uses the similarities as a device to prove to us what Dumbledore says: that it is our choices that shape who we truly are and who we become. Yes, exactly. I believe it is because Harry has lived with the Dursleys that he says "Not Slytherin" when he is sorted. Living with the Dursleys was horrible, but it has taught Harry clearly what he does NOT want to be like. One other point to make about Harry's upbringing, which I developed at greater length in the Hope essay: in the Dursley household, Harry plays the role of prisoner. When I recently re-read PoA, I was struck by how clearly Harry and Sirius's stories were mirrored, and the paralles were so strong that I couldn't believe that I didn't understand right from the beginning that Jo was signalling that Sirius was meant to be trusted. Harry is inadequately fed at the Dursleys; Sirius is gaunt in his wanted poster. Harry escapes from the Dursleys just as Sirius escapes from Azkaban. Harry hears how Sirius is a dangerous criminal just as he hears all sorts of lies told about him by Uncle Vernon to Aunt Marge--the implication is that what's being said about Sirius is false, too. Harry is on the run, convinced that he is an outcast from the wizarding world, traveling under a false name, just as he is learning about Sirius, on the run, an outcast of the wizarding world, obviously traveling under disguise. The theme of imprisonment and release actually plays through all books, with various subplots (think of George and Fred tearing the bars off his window in book Two, for example. But more than that, there's Sirius, Dobby, Winky, Barty Crouch, Jr., Hagrid, even Buckbeak--all characters who have experienced imprisonment, often wrongly.) In growing up and living through abuse, Harry is struggling toward his freedom, and being free means that you have the freedom to make choices. It is Dumbledore's job to guide him so that he learns to make the right ones. Another point, which I discussed at greater length in, I think, the Faith essay: Harry does not emerge unscathed from his horrible childhood. Specifically, we see that at times it is difficult for him to trust. He does not open up to Dumbledore when he is invited to on several occasions, probably his experience up until then has taught him, painfully, that figures in authority are not to be trusted. But he is learning, slowly how to trust. And I think he is turning into a wonderful, moral person, despite his background. This is spinning out of control, so I'll end it here. Peg From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sun Dec 2 19:57:20 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:57:20 -0500 Subject: Mudbloods (and Marriage), wizard attitudes References: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0A87A0.238347B8@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30581 Regarding the lack of laws against marriage, a friend has commented to me (based on my descriptions of the books) that the wizard world seems to be close to an anarchy. I think he has a point. There's a Ministry of Magic, but they can't even strictly control who runs Hogwarts. (A board of 12 governors does that. And how are they selected?) There are "laws" against enchanting Muggle artifacts, but the laws are routinely flouted (even by those supposedly enforcing them, e.g. Arthur Weasley). What we seem to see in the books is a society consisting of a number of competing, struggling factions, and whatever we might expect in terms of prejudicial laws in the Muggle world may not apply. We really don't have much to go on, though-- we don't even know how the Minister of Magic is chosen, much less how laws are passed. Eric Oppen suggested that many wizards may have a condescending attitude toward Muggles, even "good" ones like Arthur Weasley. I think that is true of some (possibly many), but AW strikes me as being not so much prejudiced as uninformedly fascinated. He knows that Muggles have different ways of doing things than wizards, hence his fascination with plugs, batteries, and "ekeltricity", but he doesn't really seem to think these ways are inferior, inherently. His motivation in his job seems to be genuinely protecting Muggles from threats they wouldn't recognize or be prepared to defend themselves against. (I think it's safe to assume that he wouldn't be allowed to distribute magical safety literature to Muggles at large, despite what I wrote about anarchy, above.) I find this no more prejudicial than the behavior of people who write antiviral software, to protect the rest of us from those few with the skill (and malice) to write viruses. He does act a lot like some Americans I know who've never been to another country and are still amazed by "foreign" practices. But he still expects Muggles to act like normal "civilized" human beings despite this -- he couldn't have looked so shocked at the Dursley's treatment of Harry at the beginning of GoF otherwise. And to me this means he does essentially think of Muggles as "people," despite their foreigness, not some kind of inferior species. He's passed this attitude on to the younger Weasleys, as well-- at least so much that they are able to explain the problem of shrinking keys and the like to Harry, and sound like they mean it. Even Gred and Forge seem to think tormenting Muggles is off-limits (except for Dudley, and that's because of Harry). This doesn't excuse Ron's opinion about giants, IMO. That's a much more clearcut case of prejudice. And note how quickly even Hermione picked up the prejudice against Parselmouths. > It would be interesting if Lord V's downfall came from underestimating > Muggles, or the talents of a Muggle-born like Hermione, wouldn't it? It would surprise me if JKR *doesn't* use this plot device. Though I think Voldemort is ultimately going to self-destruct... probably from "forgetting" some crucial fact. Must be a side-effect from all those dangerous transformations he's undergone.... Elizabeth From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sun Dec 2 18:11:14 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 18:11:14 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (VERY LONG) Message-ID: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 30582 Myself and a friend (Mandy) did some research into the woods of the wands and came across some VERY interesting stuff that could tell us a lot about future plot lines in the books, about the different characters personalities and even their futures: OAK (Hagrid - before Snapped): The tree of truth. It is ancient and wise and has an old spirit. Oak symbolises wisdom, strength, and endurance. Oak is extremely versatile and can be used in many areas of magic. It can be used in spells for protection, strength, success and stability. Does anyone else look at that list and find themselves thinking of Dumbledore more than Hagrid? YEW (Voldemort) : It symbolises transformation, great age, and reincarnation. Yew is a good shield for magical energies, any that directly hit the wood are reflected. Symbol of the deities of death and rebirth. All parts of the tree are poisonous. Eternal life and immortality sums up the attributes of the Yew tree. Signals a rebirth of the self. Raising the Dead. The Yew is known as the death tree in all European countries. We found this interesting as almost every website we found yew on said it was used in the re-incarnation of the dead, whether that be of ones self or generally speaking. What did Voldemort do in the last book but a form of regeneration, maybe it could even be termed re-incarnation. Funny then that that should be connected to the meaning of his wand wood don't you think? This in turn leads us on to: Holly (Harry) : A symbol of the life force, vitality and immortality. It wards off negative energies. The shiny green leaves represent the vitality of life even in the coldest of times. Symbolises combat, defence, and a "look but don't touch" beauty. It is used as a life symbol. The Holly eases thoughts of jealousy and mistrust while protecting from evil spirits. The Holly will indicate a balance and strength needed to overcome challenges. The knowledge of when to fight and when to defend. Protection, Anti Lightning, Luck, Dream Magic. Protection, prophecy. Ok so what do we have here then? What's all this talk from JK about Harry not surviving past book 7, and yet we have been doing research and his wand is all to do with life force and immortality. Hmmm, is this a little red herring from JK? Especially after the meaning of LV's wand connecting so nicely with what he has just done. We also have the ability to: WARD OF ENEMIES, well it's warded of LV enough times. DREAM MAGIC AND PROPHECY, how many people have said something about Harry's dreams being important and his scar predicting things? PROTECTION, again important due to the amount of times he has escaped LV and the protection he has/had from his mother. BALANCE AND STRENGTH (to deal with challenges) well come on he's had enough challenges to prove this isn't just a coincidence - all those at the beginning of book 1, the task in the TWT the is it goes on. KNOWLEDGE OF WHEN TO FIGHT AND DEFEND: Pretty well what happened in the last book then with the imperious curse, and fighting LV and how to do it etc! Also with Quirrell in the first book (grabbing face etc) even in the 2nd book with the basilisk, and that instinct of not killing Sirius in the 3rd book. PROPHECY: Well we already think that Trelawny's prediction is to do with Harry. I think there is more in there but there is a lot of things that connect for it all just to be coincidence. Also having done all this I now find something very odd about the film: Research: "Holly is a beautiful white wood with an almost invisible grain; looks very much like ivory." Interesting then that in the Film Harry's wand is Black - or at least VERY dark brown!!!!!! Lily's wand is made of willow, well the meaning of willow is to do with dying young and she died pretty young if she was only a maximum age of 23. The only problem here is that Ron's (new) wand is willow too. Maybe we should be worried about Ron even after what JK said about him not dying. I couldn't find much on Mahogany as the sites we looked at were all to do with the meaning of British trees to the Celts. Mahogany is not a British tree and so was not mentioned. All I could find on this was "Anti Lightning". I also looked up some other wand woods that someone mentioned on my own site and came up with the following: Ash (Cedric): Intelligent, talented, likes to play with its fate, very reliable and trust-worthy, faithful. Reliable/trustworthy and Faithful: all characteristics of Hufflepuff and Cedric was a typical Hufflepuff going on Dumbledore's! Speech at the end of book four. Hornbeam (Krum) I only found this on one site but what I found was rather interesting! "is seldom happy with his/her feelings, mistrusts most people, is never sure of its decisions" sounds quite a bit like Krum really. Rosewood (Fleur)I could not find Rosewood on ANY of the sites I looked at. There were a couple of other woods that we looked up but I can't find the information we found on them any more. I just find it really interesting that so much that we found connects directly to it's owner, might explain why the wand chooses the person not the other way round. The wand instinctively knows what that person is like and will be like so plays to their abilities and allows them to fulfil their potential so to speak. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catlady at wicca.net Sun Dec 2 20:06:43 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 20:06:43 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of House / House-Elves / Prejudice Message-ID: <9ue1kj+i1uf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30583 Sorry about more than one post, but I couldn't fit more topics in the previous header. Little Red (hen? riding hood? rooster?) wrote: > Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to > mid 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went > to school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? It seems > that the other HoH's are much older. I believe that the Head of a House has to be Former Pupil (Old Boy or Old Girl) of that House, and maybe not many Slytherins become Hogwarts Professors. Maybe any other Slytherin professors are just as young or very bad administrators or not sufficiently dominating of personality to keep Slytherin kids in order. Professor Trelawney might well be a Slytherin Old Girl, but do you thinkn she'd be any good as House of Head? Margaret Dean wrote: > But it does occur to me to wonder whether the house-elf situation > is more like slavery (which most if not all of us, I suspect, > would consider insupportable even at its best, because it denies > the full humani-- um, er, let's call it =beinghood= -- of the > slave) or more like marriage (which comes in a whole spectrum of > forms, ranging from the totally satisfying to the horrifyingly > awful). Well, Pippin once asked why we didn't compare House Elves to House Wives, who also are not paid for their labor. Jim Ferer wrote: > Harry's at least a little prejudiced against the Slytherins, > isn't he? Oh, yes, how can we pontificate about prejudice (against Muggles, Muggle-borns, giants, werewolves, House Elves, etc) without questioning our own opinions of Slytherins? > That's not prejudice, that's making an informed distinction, and > that's necessary. To do otherwise is the path of relativism and > moral cowardice. What virtue is there in a dementor? Would you > care to examine your "prejudice" against Nazis or members of the > KKK? I was going to reply that I think that Dementors are Beasts rather than Beings (altho' they are not in FABOULOUS BEASTS and both Dumbledore and Voldemort spoke of "alliance" with them). As Beasts, they act according to their instinctive nature, which happens to be that they eat other people's happiness and devour souls. I imagine that that is not a matter of personal evil because it is not a matter of choice: it's just that that is what they eat. Avoiding such dangerous Beasts is not prejudice any more than avoiding trichinosis is. It's the same as, the various sorts of parasitical invertebrates that burrow into the bodies of various vertebrates and give them pain and diseases and sometimes death are not sinners, they are merely things. If the Dementors ARE Beings (in accordance with the above mentioned hints from canon), innately evil Beings are a question against Dumbledore's The fault lies in our choices not our stars, dear Brutus. How COULD a Dementor CHOOSE to stop being evil? But I must object to your statement about Nazis and Klansmen. A proper saint would believe that, as human beings with souls and free will, they have the ability to learn better and repent their past ill doing. There is in fact an ex-Neo-Nazi who wrote a book about how his journey to non-bigotry started when his son was born with (I think it was a cleft palette) and he realised that according to his ideology, the baby should be killed for being 'defective' and he couldn't stand the thought, so he started questioning his beliefs. Bringing it back to HP, Snape stopped being a Death Eater. From liquidfire at mindgate.net Sun Dec 2 18:04:52 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:04:52 +0800 Subject: Dumbledore's prejudices, HP's upbringing Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011203020452.007a42a0@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30584 Cindy wrote: >Even Dumbledore shows us something that could be construed as prejudice. He doesn't like or trust the dementors. Not just some dementors; all dementors. For some reason, I'm inclined to think this is something other than prejudice, but I can't figure out why I feel that way. I'm not too sure about this one. If you can consider Dementors a race, like goblins, giants, and merpeople, then Dumbledore's definitely biased against that particular race. But I was under the impression that the Dementors were 'created', or 'spawned' or something. Simply put, I never considered the Dementors a 'real' race. Therfore, following my assumptions, Dumbledore's dislike of Dementors might not be a prejudice in that particular sense. Maybe he doesn't like Dementors because he believes they're evil, evil, I say! Mwahahahahahahahaha! --- Okay, I've read a lot of stuff regarding Harry's upbringing. When I first read PS/SS, I kind of dismissed the whole 'child abuse' thing at first. Sure, it was abusive, but hey, it's a children's book, a fairy tale. Look at the crap Cinderella, Rapunzel and Snow White had to put up with, and yet they lived 'happily ever after'. I thought it would be the same thing. I was dead wrong. I'm am sooooo sure I'm not the first person to notice this, but the whole HP series matures with every passing book. When I noticed that trend, when Harry became more 'real' to me, I started getting bothered by the abuse he got from the Dursleys. So bothered, it's difficult for me to read the chapters with the Dursleys (and that's saying a lot; I've read through all four books countless times, I'm holding PS/SS now, as a matter of fact). I guess the 'abuse' was put in there as a contrasting device -- pushing the reader to WANT Hogwarts for Harry, driving home the fact that Hogwarts is far, far better than Privet Drive. I can recognize that because I'm a writer myself. But it still bothers me. I don't want to fill my e-mail with off-HP chatter, or Amy will Avada Kedavra me (or turn me into a footstool). Let's just say that I live in a place where Child Abuse laws aren't strong enough yet. I'm just glad Harry's getting the love he deserves from his friends and the rest of the Weasleys. heather wrote: >If Harry cannot have his own parents to be there and constantly provide him with love, I can think of no one better than Mrs. Weasley to do that job. Amen. From gwynyth at drizzle.com Sun Dec 2 17:58:52 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 11:58:52 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <20011202105045.A16448@shore.net> References: <9ubq38+2r10@eGroups.com> <9udbhg+rqa1@eGroups.com> <20011202105045.A16448@shore.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30585 At 10:50 AM -0500 12/2/01, Chip Olson wrote: >My wife, who studied the effects and implications of childhood trauma >very intensively in graduate school, has commented that Harry's level >of coping and social adjustment is far, far higher than could be >expected from someone with that kind of upbringing, to the point of >being utterly unrealistic. She would have expected him to develop into >a complete sociopath (and she is *very* much not the sort to >underestimate the resilience of the human psyche). I think it honestly depends - I know a couple of people who come from similarly nasty backgrounds who are good and stable people now, and able to get on with their lives. In at least one case, the person in question was about as resilient as Harry at a similar age (and managed to deal with getting themselves out of the environment at about 15.) I think there's a couple of reasons that he comes out of it so strongly. 1) He did have loving and stable parents when he was little. This has already been commented on in this thread, so I'm just mentioning it. 2) It's also likely that the actual seriously nasty stuff from the Dursleys didn't start until he was somewhat older (4 or 5). For one thing, there's not a lot of amusement value in teasing someone who doesn't yet comprehend that you're poking fun at them. 3) We don't know anything about his early schooling, except that part of that time, Dudley and co. picked on him. It's certainly possible that he got a portion of stability from school or a particular teacher, even if he doesn't recall it as special. He certainly *seems* to have done at least reasonably well in school, as we never see problems with his comprehension or writing skills in the books, except when he's missing wizarding world context for information. (And he's not the one having problems writing enough inches for his essays at Hogwarts, either.) 4) We don't know what sort of stuff he was reading in school, or perhaps in his closet. A reasonable portion of children's literature (particularly some of the more British-specific literature) focuses on this kind of 'unwilling and poor parenting' and an eventual happy ending if you can just hang in there long enough. 5) The stuff the Dursleys do to him is very clearly *not right* - it's not subtle, it's not careful. It's blatant and obvious that there's something wrong. It's a lot easier to be resilient against something that is so blatantly wrong than it is against something subtle. (And even the emotional stuff isn't subtle.) 6) It's my impression that the British school system is a little more flexible in regards to people getting away from neglectful parents than the American one is. (I'm American, my parents were British and raised in Ireland and Wales, respectively) - my impression is that it's somewhat easier to deal with college/schools if you're bright (including tuition) if you don't have parental support, but are willing to work hard. Not *easy*, maybe, but easier than the process for trying to get massive loans for school without parental/guardian filing of forms is in the US. Thus there's a possible hypothesis that he might have realised that if he just hung in there, quietly got good marks, and got himself out as soon as possible, he'd be ok. 7) The stuff he goes through is unpleasant, certainly, but again, he's not suffering from ongoing physical abuse in the sense of physical injuries. He gets fed. He gets clothed. Much of the time, he seems to be ignored, rather than used/manipulated/teased, especially if he does his chores (which, again, while not particularly *fair* for an 11 year old to be doing, aren't exactly seriously painful either.) If he's got a light in his cupboard, ok, it's not exactly *comfortable* or luxurious, but if he's in there, Dudley can't do much to him, and he could escape to his own thoughts. 8) The 'rules' he has to follow also seem to be reasonably consistent - the times he slips up, it's pretty clear that he knew exactly what happened. That's different from a situation where the rules change every day. Again, if he just keeps his head down and follows the rules, it mostly seems like he gets left largely alone. This is a lot easier to deal with than if he got punished one day for doing something he'd been told not to do the previous day, or if there was a constant flipping of attitude. 9) It seems like Harry is at least something of an introvert - it's usually a lot easier for introverts to deal with certain kinds of teasing or unpleasant stuff if they're already reasonably resilient, because they find it easier to retreat into their own heads. I think there's reasonable evidence from the books to suggest Harry does this at least sometimes. It's a lot harder for someone who needs much more interaction with others to stay amused/content/not-bored to do this as easily. -Jenett -- ----- gwynyth at drizzle.com ******* gleewood at gleewood.org ------ "My friend, there is a fine line between coincidence and fate" Ardeth Bay - _The Mummy Returns_ -------------------- http://gleewood.org/ -------------------- From fordpr1020 at aol.com Sun Dec 2 17:39:33 2001 From: fordpr1020 at aol.com (JC) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 17:39:33 -0000 Subject: Weasleys and Harry was Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9udk0g+7sej@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9udp0l+34ai@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30586 Heather wrote: >But I think that Harry > has always felt love from Mrs. Weasley, this is particularly evident > in The Parting of Ways chapter in GoF. If Harry cannot have his own > parents to be there and constantly provide him with love, I can think > of no one better than Mrs. Weasley to do that job. This brings up an interesting scenario...could the Weasleys be considering adopting Harry? It's possible, although I find it to be a bit farfetched. There's also the question, then, if Ron is jealous of the attention Harry receives from his mother. Ron's had to be just another middle child for years, and all of a sudden Harry shows up and gets smothered with affection. Just my 2 Knutes. --jc From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sun Dec 2 17:02:43 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 17:02:43 -0000 Subject: Dark Wizards and House traits - good and evil. References: <9uc4fn+f7f5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <008d01c17b55$f4e26980$9118073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 30587 Amy Z wrote: > > but do we really > > believe no Dark wizard has ever come out of Gryffindor? Jennie wrote: > I've seen some speculation that dark wizards could come out of the > other Hogwarts houses. This is possible, but Hagrid tells Harry > otherwise. In SS chapter 5 he says, "There's not a single witch or > wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." I used to completely ignore this quote about Slytherin and dark wizards until it was pointed out on another list I am part of. There has to be at least one bad wizard who came out of Gryffindor. Think about it: James was in Gryffindor, JK has said so and it has been implied in the books. This would imply that Sirius, Lupin and Peter were too, otherwise how did they become such good friends? So in terms of the wizarding world, who don't know of Sirius's innocence, he is a wizard from Gryffindor who "turned bad". Even knowing what we know, that Sirius is not the traitor and that Peter is, that still means there was a Gryffindor who turned bad. Of course, if we later find out that MWPP weren't in Gryffindor then that still doesn't completely fall apart as it is unlikely (going on their personalities) that they were in Slytherin, and if they weren't in Slytherin then there were still wizards not from Slytherin who went bad as they must have came out of either Hufflepuff (unlikely) or Ravenclaw (possible - maybe not Peter though). Gryffindor does however seem to be the most likely house for them all, from what we know about them and how you interpret bravery. James, we already know is quite brave in one sense of the word, in that he tried to protect Lily and Harry (even though it appears LV was after him too) plus going down the tunnel to save Snape etc: Sirius was brave enough not to completely fall to pieces while in Azkaban for about 13 years: Lupin's bravery is different in that he has to cope with being a werewolf, he doesn't run away from it. And as for Peter, we don't necessarily know what exactly his bravery is but he seems similar to Neville and Neville got into Gryffindor (I do not however subscribe to the idea that Neville will turn into another Peter). We don't know for example that Peter's bravery isn't an example of what might be classed "evil" bravery. Surely, just as cunning can be used for both evil and sometimes good, bravery can come under the same category, as can friendship and intelligence, it all depends on how you use them and how other people interpret them (especially bravery, cunning and Intelligence). Examples: Ravenclaw: You could use your intelligence to either help people by creating cures in medicine etc (GOOD) or you might decide to use it against people by inventing bombs (or a Wizard equivalent)etc. (EVIL - but good in terms of the people you are doing it for - depends on how your interpret it). Hufflepuff: Friendship can be used to make friends, make people feel good etc (GOOD) or it could be used to get what you want out of people, to use them and fool them into thinking you are being nice.(EVIL) Slytherin: Cunning, well apart from the obvious of the evil side with LV and taking over the world (EVIL), surely that can be used to outsmart people, for example if you were a spy, (Snape working for Dumbledore). (GOOD - for your own side). Gryffindor: Bravery is a weird category as it can be interpreted in different ways depending on who you are just like cunning and intelligence. For example, something that we would class as an "evil" act: (Hypothetically) Lucius Malfoy sacrifices his life to save LV. We would see that as an evil act, because in our opinions LV is evil and so are his followers. Something we would class as a "Good" act: James and Lily sacrificing their lives to save Harry. We see this as a good act because we believe Harry and his parents were on the "good" side. Now what is the difference? Both sets of people have showed bravery in giving their lives to protect something they feel is worth protecting. Why does that change just because one set is considered to be an "evil" group of people and the other are considered to be a "good" set of people? It is still bravery but used in the same way but interpreted differently. Plus what is "good" and "bad"? To us Harry is "good" and LV is "bad" but to the death eaters, Harry is "bad" and LV is "good". The only reason we don't see LV as good is because JK has written her books from Harry's point of view, if it was Malfoy's then the likelihood is we would see it the other way round. JK wants us to see LV as the bad person and Harry/Dumbledore etc as the good people. We are biased by what JK wants us to see. There are also different types of bravery: For example it can be used in the obvious ways of (James saving Lily and Harry), or in less obvious ways (Neville having to face what happened to his parents/Lupin having to deal with being a werewolf). Even Snape, who we know wasn't a Gryffindor, must have shown considerable bravery to spy on LV, risking his own life to try and help Dumbledore and the others. And we can't forget Peter, cutting off his own hand to help give LV his body back, that must have taken a tremendous amount of bravery but we see that as an evil act. Bravery is all a matter of personal opinion, the only reason we think that cunning is the worst trait out of all the houses and bravery is the best is because that is the way that JK makes us think. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sun Dec 2 20:19:21 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 15:19:21 -0500 Subject: Voldemort's "happy" thoughts References: <1007297052.835.15085.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0A8CC9.E4E2CB@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30588 A couple of people (Cindy and Liquidfire) responded to my question about whether Voldemort has "happy" thoughts by pointing out that the happiness of the thought seems to be a subjective thing. I agree. Harry is able to concentrate on things like winning the House cup, that might or might not matter to someone else, to produce a Petronus. I was really getting at something a bit deeper. I don't think Voldemort is a "happy" person. Maybe I'm splitting hairs here. I know Cindy pointed out the scene where Voldemort was at least "excited" about the idea of whacking Harry in GoF. But I don't know if he has any ideas in his head that would really count as "happy." I can see him being "satisfied", "excited", "smug", possibly even "pleased" (though he seems like a hard guy to please), but not really "happy." I guess I just see him as being too twisted up for happiness. I'm basing this partly on what Sirius said about his ability to stay sane in Azkaban: he knew he was innocent. It wasn't a "happy" thought, so the Dementors couldn't take it from him. It probably also wouldn't have been useful to generate a Patronus. But Sirius is capable of being happy: remember when Harry says he wants to come live with him, and he smiles? Suddenly Harry sees how he *is* the guy in the wedding picture. His opportunities for happiness have been few and far between, lately, but he is capable of it. For the record, I don't see Lucius Malfoy being capable of "happiness" either. And Draco is rapidly heading in that direction. (So is Fudge, probably.) All of this came up, of course, because we were wondering if the Dementors would turn on Voldemort and be his undoing. Other than not liking the idea of Voldemort's soul still being around, even in Dementor-digested form, I think that would be a workable outcome. Then Harry & co could destroy the Dementors, who have been much more thoroughly dehumanized than Voldemort can be. Except that Voldemort may easily know of some other way of driving off the Dementors that doesn't require happy thoughts, of course. Elizabeth (Who thinks the "treatment" for Dementor exposure is perfect.) From heymynameisabird at hotmail.com Sun Dec 2 21:50:21 2001 From: heymynameisabird at hotmail.com (heymynameisabird at hotmail.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:50:21 -0000 Subject: Dark Wizards and House traits - good and evil. In-Reply-To: <008d01c17b55$f4e26980$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9ue7mt+4s7h@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30589 Jennie wrote: I've seen some speculation that dark wizards could come out of the other Hogwarts houses. This is possible, but Hagrid tells Harry otherwise. In SS chapter 5 he says, "There's not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." Hollydaze wrote: > I used to completely ignore this quote about Slytherin and dark wizards until it was pointed out on another list I am part of. > There has to be at least one bad wizard who came out of Gryffindor. I always took this quote to be simply Hagrid's opinion or exaggeration, i.e. there are lots of Slytherins who have gone bad, but there are people from other houses too - it's just less usual. After all, bravery, loyalty, intelligence are three very dangerous things, because they can all lead to the unshakable belief that you are right. This belief can be harmless, indeed it can be very productive; but whilst it can make you Socrates it can just as easily make you Hitler. I realise that JKR is writing a child's book, and therefore at least a moderate amount of "goodies" and "badies" without any "inbetweenies" must appear, but for those of us who don't live in a black-and-white world, I think a villan may spring from any house, and from any of the shades of grey. Love Helen xx (Helmione) From ktchong73 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 21:47:43 2001 From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (ktchong73 at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:47:43 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9ue7hv+funf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30590 Fleur Delacour's wand: Rosewood. "Fleur" is French for "flower", and a rose is a type of flower. Lily Evans Potter's wand: Willow. The Chinese bodhisattva Guan-Yin holds a willow twig in her hand that symbolizes sacrifice and cycle of life and death. An important note on Ron's new wand: Cedric Diggory's wand core is unicorn hair. In Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone, the centaur Ronan tells Hagrid "always the innocent are the first victims". Then they go on to discover the dead unicorn. Cedric's wand contained unicorn hair, and he was the first victim of Lord Voldemort (after Lord Voldemort's rescurrection). The core of Ron's new wand is, like Cedric's, unicorn hair. The wood of Ron's new wand is willow (like Lily Potter's, means sacrifice and cycle of life and death.) From srae at mindspring.com Sun Dec 2 21:56:33 2001 From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:56:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wand woods (VERY LONG) Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011202165633.00a8a3d0@pop.mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30591 Hollydaze wrote: >Myself and a friend (Mandy) did some research into the woods of the wands and came across some VERY interesting stuff that could tell us a lot about future plot lines in the books, about the different characters personalities and even their futures: >Lily's wand is made of willow, well the meaning of willow is to do with dying young and she died pretty young if she was only a maximum age of 23. The only problem here is that Ron's (new) wand is willow too. Maybe we should be worried about Ron even after what JK said about him not dying. Ooooh, interesting topic! I did a little research into willow because, well, I don't like the thought of anything Ron has being associated ONLY with early death! And I knew I'd seen a bit of this sort of thing on willow before. Here is one thing I found. The website is www.treelore.com if anyone is interested in looking...they have several different kinds of trees listed. I'm pulling out a few of the parts that seemed relevant. Lore and Divinatory Aspects: Willow is associated with death, femininity, love, and healing. It posesses the powers of love, divination, friendship, joy, love, peace, protection, and healing. Magical Usage For love magic, protection magic, healing magic, and peaceful magic. Used to create loyalty, make friendship pacts, treaties, or alliances. Used for intuition, knowledge, gentle nurturing, and will elucidate the feminine qualities of both men and women. Its leaves are used in love attraction sachets and moon magic wands from its wood. Used to dowse for water (underground), earth energies, and buried objects. Used combined with sandalwood to invoke spirits. Placed in homes, it protects against evil and malign sorcery. Carried, the wood will give bravery, dexterity, and help one overcome the fear of death. If one needs to get something off their chest or to share a secret, confess to a willow and your secret will be trapped. Willow wood is good for magical harps. Good for planting and lining burial graves for its symbolism of death and protection. Quite a bit about loyalty, bravery, friendship and healing. Interesting... Shannnon From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 21:37:05 2001 From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 21:37:05 -0000 Subject: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <20011202105045.A16448@shore.net> Message-ID: <9ue6u1+fv1o@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30592 A sociopath? Harry is certainly the antithesis of that! My upbringing was very similar to Harry's (add to the fact that I was born deaf and didn't hear anything till I was about 3) but I turned out all right. Well, except for the little voices in my head...hehe. Nancy --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Chip Olson wrote: > Quoth Joanne0012 at a...: > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., nancyaw2001 at y... wrote: > > > > It's amazing to me that Harry is able, despite his childhood with the > > > Dursley's, to love and to trust. > > > Harry does act like an emotionally abused kid, hiding his emotional reactions > > and constantly doubting his own value. His coping does, however, seem to be > > like kids who are described as "resilient," they are true Stoics, with an inner > > life and confidence that they manage to hide, but which enables them to > > blossom once they're released. > > My wife, who studied the effects and implications of childhood trauma > very intensively in graduate school, has commented that Harry's level > of coping and social adjustment is far, far higher than could be > expected from someone with that kind of upbringing, to the point of > being utterly unrealistic. She would have expected him to develop into > a complete sociopath (and she is *very* much not the sort to > underestimate the resilience of the human psyche). > > -- > -Chip Olson. | ceo at shore dot net > "Here comes the sun, doo-doo-doo-doo, > Here comes the sun, I say, It's all right..." > -George Harrison 1943- 2001. > > I resent having ads attached to my messages. From eleri at aracnet.com Sun Dec 2 18:43:35 2001 From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:43:35 -0500 Subject: Potters In-Reply-To: <1007242323.2569.58678.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011202133944.00e2b860@mail.aracnet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30593 At 09:32 PM 12/1/01 +0000, you wrote: >Well, he didn't have only a year, remember, in the first chapter, >Harry was only a year old. By the time Dumbledore tells Harry he >lived because of Lily's love, Harry was 12. I guess by then, he had >it figured out! Plus, it's entirely possible that there's been examples of this sort of protection happening before. Dumbledore does say that it's "ancient magic". The concept of Willing Sacrifice makes Great Magic is a pretty common one in most magical theories. Dumbledore probably never brought it up 1) because he'd not seen it in action re: Harry therefore 2) he didn't want to give Harry a false sense of security. Eleri From eleri at aracnet.com Sun Dec 2 18:55:54 2001 From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 13:55:54 -0500 Subject: House Elves In-Reply-To: <1007266180.6241.1765.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011202135217.00e311c0@mail.aracnet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30594 At 04:09 AM 12/2/01 +0000, you wrote: > > The social structure of the wizarding world depends upon labor > > provided by house-elves who, clearly, do not have the same degree of > > rights that wizards have. > >There was a spirited debate a while back, on whether the house-elves >*want* this. If someone firmly and repeatedly seeks a certain role and >is happy in it, and alteration of their role causes them grief, is that >alteration doing any good to the recipient? My impression was that servitude was in the house-elves magical nature, that it wasn't a matter of what they wanted to do or didn't want to do, but it was how they were made. A bit like (excuse the poor analogy) dogs being bread for certain traits. Dobby only becomes free when a certain set of criteria are met (the sock), and it changes his magical nature. He still has to adjust to not being required to serve a particular person, but it is still in his nature to serve, and he transfers that reflex to Dumbledore and Harry. Eleri From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Sun Dec 2 22:48:07 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 17:48:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's prejudices, HP's upbringing Message-ID: <15c.5173230.293c09a7@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30595 I think that Dumbledore hates -all- the dementors, because they are evil. they love human pain and suffering, and happily exist in the darkest of places - also, they were involved with Voldie, and unlike the giants, all the dementors love horrible happenings *Chelsea* From res0icpa at verizon.net Sun Dec 2 22:50:05 2001 From: res0icpa at verizon.net (Heather Glude) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 14:50:05 -0800 Subject: Fantastic Beasts and Care of Magical Creatures Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30596 I was rereading the books, yet again and I noticed something I hadn't noticed before. I couldn't find any mention of it in the archives, although I may have missed a search phrase. I couldn't find any mention of HRH taking Care of Magical Creatures before book 3. In book three, it says Harry "...had to buy his new schoolbooks, which would include those for his two new subjects, Care of Magical Creatures and Divination." Why do you suppose Harry has to buy Fantastic Beasts two years before he takes it? I found one posts that presented the idea that books are used for more than one class. Could Fantastic Beasts be for Potions - the animal version of One Thousand Magical Herbs and Fungi? Perhaps one of the other classes? Heather From philnel at ksu.edu Sun Dec 2 22:44:18 2001 From: philnel at ksu.edu (Philip Nel) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:44:18 -0600 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods References: <1007323713.3227.94930.m2@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0AAEC1.E32B2644@ksu.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30597 Dear all: Heather (uma) quotes me: > > By definition, a prejudice is not justified. The word means to > judge beforehand, to judge without knowledge. > She then writes: > Ah ha, well, now we're teetering into the realms of value > clarification and the sticky problem of connotation vs denotation. As > such is off-topic, I'll merely point out that semantic definitions > *don't,* IMO, dictate the relative social/moral value. "Justified" is > a bit of a loaded term here. Actually, no, we're not headed into these realms. It's not about "connotation vs. denotation." It's about the definition of the word "prejudice." If the list will forgive me from quoting from _Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language_ (1989), the word "prejudice" (as a noun) is defined as follows: "1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason. 2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable. 3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, directed against a racial, religious, or national group. 4. such attitudes considered collectively: 'The war against prejudice is never-ending.' 5. disadvantage resulting from some judgment or action of another: 'a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.' 6. resulting injury or detriment" (p. 1135). In other words, to judge Hagrid solely on the fact of his giantess mother is to form an opinion "without knowledge, thought, or reason"; it is an "unreasonable feeling [...] or attitude." Or, to judge Remus Lupin solely on his status as a werewolf is, I would argue, similarly unreasonable. Rowling wishes us to see Hagrid as Hagrid (not as half-giant), and to view Lupin as Lupin (not as werewolf). Of course, she wishes us to see why people of the wizarding world would hold prejudices against Hagrid and Lupin, but she does not condone such prejudices -- precisely because they are opinions formed "without knowledge, thought, or reason." Yours lexicographically, Phil -- Philip Nel Assistant Professor Department of English Denison Hall Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506-0701 U.S.A. ----------------------------------------- http://www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/ philnel at ksu.edu From catlady at wicca.net Sun Dec 2 23:49:21 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:49:21 -0000 Subject: House Elves In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.0.20011202135217.00e311c0@mail.aracnet.com> Message-ID: <9ueem1+4oqe@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30598 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., CB wrote: > My impression was that servitude was in the house-elves magical > nature, that it wasn't a matter of what they wanted to do or didn't > want to do, but it was how they were made. A bit like (excuse the > poor analogy) dogs being bread for certain traits. There were a lot of readers criticising Hermione for trying to fix things for the House Elves according to her own ideas without asking them what THEY wanted. I suppose she should have asked them what they wanted, but (like dogs) perhaps they can't SAY what they want, but some of it is pretty clear. If I had been Hermione, I would have started an Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to House Elves, and agitated for laws to fine and imprison people who abuse their House Elves like the Malfoys, and to give the Bureau of House Elf relocation the mandate to confiscate House Elves from unworthy wizards and move them to safer homes. Someone in HPfGU did some research in Muggle folklore and found that the familiar Brownie Household Elf is called a Dobby someplace in England. This researcher, finding that Muggle tradition holds that Dobbies, Brownies, and the like leave homes that disrespect them, such as by leaving big messes for them to clean up, or not putting out bowls of milk for them, concluded that some one has cast a spell on all the House Elves, something like a generational inherited Imperius Curse, to override their free will and destroy their ability to leave a place where they are being abused. She said what House Elves need is to have the Curse removed, not to have some human form a union to demand pensions for them. From catlady at wicca.net Mon Dec 3 00:01:15 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:01:15 -0000 Subject: Fantastic Beasts and Care of Magical Creatures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uefcb+904h@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30599 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Heather Glude wrote: > Why do you suppose Harry has to buy Fantastic Beasts two years > before he takes it? I found one posts that presented the idea that > books are used for more than one class. Could Fantastic Beasts be > for Potions - the animal version of One Thousand Magical Herbs and > Fungi? Perhaps one of the other classes? I think FB was for Defense Against Dark Arts. Remember in the thrid year, with Lupin, they cover Boggarst and Hinkypunks and all those creatures who are in FB ending with werewolves -- and FB is in alphabetical order. Remember that they had pretty lousy DADA teachers for Harry's first two years: maybe what Lupin gave them in thrid year, dangerous but not necessarily evil magical creatures, was supposed to be the first year curriculum. Maybe Snape wasn't just being nasty when he said that he would have expected a first year student to be able to deal with Boggarts. From meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 00:09:31 2001 From: meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com (meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:09:31 -0000 Subject: Attractive Characters (WAS McGonagall's house/Gryffindors in Glasses) In-Reply-To: <9ubti9+o99a@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uefrr+d0m2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30600 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > Jenny wrote: > > > Somehow Percy found a girlfriend and Krum has pursued Hermione, who > is > > often referred to as *not* pretty, so yes, JKR wants us to all look > > beyond physical traits for attractiveness. > > > > You might even say that JKR *forces* us to look beyond looks. There > are scores of characters in the wizarding world, but very few appear > to be knock-outs, or even physically attractive. The list of the > definitely and consistently attractive includes Fleur, Cedric and > Cho. Sirius seems alone among the adults who is characterized as > attractive. (Help me if I've missed someone who is definitely > physically attractive based on his/her description in the books). > The list of the unattractive and even repulsive, however, seems > endless by comparison. > > Cindy I must say that there are some definetly attractive qualities in Lupin. He's intelligent, sensible, brave, has a sense of humor, and there's just something about his somewhat frail constitution and peppered gray hair, like he's seen a lot at a fairly young age. Of course, this attractiveness is somewhat marred by his turning into a wolf once a month. Perhgaps this is yet another way that JKR breaks traditional stereotypes about physical attractiveness being synonymous with all-around perfection. Aslo along these lines, Gilderoy Lockheart is consistantly described as being physically attractive, but is almost completely useless. Sandi From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 00:38:31 2001 From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (Megan) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 00:38:31 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9uehi7+8fi1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30601 Hollydaze wrote: (some really awesome stuff about wood & wands) > OAK (Hagrid - before Snapped): > The tree of truth. > It is ancient and wise and has an old spirit. > Oak symbolises wisdom, strength, and endurance. > Oak is extremely versatile and can be used in many areas of magic. > It can be used in spells for protection, strength, success and stability. > > Does anyone else look at that list and find themselves thinking of Dumbledore more than Hagrid? I think Hagrid is wise in his own right. He may not spew worth the wisdom & famous quotables of Dumbledore, but Hagrid contains his own practical smarts. Hagrid is the one who confronts Run & Harry about Hermione in POA--he recognizes the vast importance of friendship. Hagrid is first to befriend Harry, providing him with the important counsel and comraderie to a very unsure boy. Hagrid is perhaps the most relaxed in GOF, saying perhaps one of my most favorite lines: "What comes, will cime, and we'll meet it when it does." Hagrid endures a lifetime of being a mutant--half-giant expelled from Hogwarts, "less than wizard" to many, I'm sure ("respected" only from sheer size). Hagrid is always honest...I don't think we've ever seen him less than open with HRH about the important things. He's obviously strong & well-skilled at his work with animals and beings. He may not be adept at *magic* but he's quite good at other things. Yes, I think oak works quite well for Hagrid. > YEW (Voldemort) : > It symbolises transformation, great age, and reincarnation. > Yew is a good shield for magical energies, any that directly hit the wood are reflected. > Symbol of the deities of death and rebirth. > All parts of the tree are poisonous. > Eternal life and immortality sums up the attributes of the Yew tree. > Signals a rebirth of the self. > Raising the Dead. > The Yew is known as the death tree in all European countries. *shivers and wonders if JKR is also a closet arborist* > Holly (Harry) : > A symbol of the life force, vitality and immortality. > It wards off negative energies. > The shiny green leaves represent the vitality of life even in the coldest of times. > Symbolises combat, defence, and a "look but don't touch" beauty. > It is used as a life symbol. > The Holly eases thoughts of jealousy and mistrust while protecting from evil spirits. > The Holly will indicate a balance and strength needed to overcome challenges. > The knowledge of when to fight and when to defend. > Protection, Anti Lightning, Luck, Dream Magic. > Protection, prophecy. I cannot express how awesome I find all this! It's just amazing the see these correlations. It's like examining names & word entymology, but on a much better level. > > Lily's wand is made of willow, well the meaning of willow is to do with dying young and she died pretty young if she was only a maximum age of 23. The only problem here is that Ron's (new) wand is willow too. Maybe we should be worried about Ron even after what JK said about him not dying. *getting a bit scared for Ron & the several "early death" prophecies that keep popping up* I just really really hope this is one time when examining origins of names & devices is a red herring & means absolutely nothing. It seems to me that a death so important could almost destroy Harry, thus destroying the series (not to mention destroy the fans!). -Megan From meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 01:14:23 2001 From: meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com (meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:14:23 -0000 Subject: Weasleys and Harry was Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9udp0l+34ai@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uejlf+rl6n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30602 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "JC" wrote: JC: > This brings up an interesting scenario...could the Weasleys be > considering adopting Harry? It's possible, although I find it to be > a bit farfetched. > > There's also the question, then, if Ron is jealous of the attention > Harry receives from his mother. Ron's had to be just another middle > child for years, and all of a sudden Harry shows up and gets > smothered with affection. > > Just my 2 Knutes. > > --jc I would love for the Weasleys to adopt Harry, but for some reason I don't see him leaving the Dursleys. Why would Dumbledore keep Harry there, in those horrible conditions, for his enitre childhood if there wasn't some purpose in it? And I don't totally buy the idea that Harry just could not have handled fame as a child and was therefore better off growing up with his only muggle relatives. There really must be something else to it. Sandi From Dar20 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 01:34:40 2001 From: Dar20 at aol.com (Darlene) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:34:40 -0000 Subject: Weasleys and Harry was Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9uejlf+rl6n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uekrg+9vop@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30603 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., meepmeepziptang at h... wrote: > And I don't totally buy the idea > that Harry just could not have handled fame as a child and was > therefore better off growing up with his only muggle relatives. Doesn't Voldemort say it GoF that Harry couldn't have been touched at Hogwart's or in the care of his relations? So, Dumbledore left Harry on Privet Drive so that he was protected. The Dursleys were his only known relatives. And that's why a portkey had to be used to remove Harry from Hogwart's so he could be harmed. Dar From blpurdom at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 02:39:01 2001 From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:39:01 -0000 Subject: Attractive Characters (WAS McGonagall's house/Gryffindors in Glasses) In-Reply-To: <9uefrr+d0m2@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ueok5+khv1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30604 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., meepmeepziptang at h... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > > Jenny wrote: > > > > > Somehow Percy found a girlfriend and Krum has pursued > > > Hermione, who is often referred to as *not* pretty, so yes, > > > JKR wants us to all look beyond physical traits for > > > attractiveness. "Somehow" Percy has found a girlfriend? He is never described as being unattractive, merely having glasses. (He is also described as annoyingly self-absorbed, ambitious and ponderous, but those things have nothing to do with physical appearance. Presumably, Penelope tolerates these things.) As for Hermione, once again, she is described as having bushy hair and rather large teeth (until she no longer does have the large teeth) but there is never a judgmental adjective applied to her like "unattractive." Her personality is described as a bit abrasive when she first meets the boys on the train, but she is never outright called physically unattractive. (This is from Harry's POV, remember.) Likewise, Ron is described with red hair, freckles, a long nose, and as rather tall. None of these are judgmental terms, merely descriptive. The point I'm trying to make is that we get very loose, brief descriptions of people that paint pictures rather than dictate how we regard them. If you think a tall red-haired boy with glasses is attractive, you will probably understand perfectly well what Penelope sees in Percy. Likewise, if you like bushy hair on a girl and someone who speaks their mind, Hermione seems like quite a catch. If you want a tall bloke with red hair and a long nose, Ron Weasley coming up. If you think those features are unattractive-- then you're free to think so. JKR never tries to get us to think one way or the other about these three people until the moment when Harry thinks of Hermione as pretty when he finally realizes that's her on Krum's arm at the ball. > > You might even say that JKR *forces* us to look beyond looks. > > There are scores of characters in the wizarding world, but very > > few appear to be knock-outs, or even physically attractive. The > > list of the definitely and consistently attractive includes > > Fleur, Cedric and Cho. Sirius seems alone among the adults who > > is characterized as attractive. (Help me if I've missed someone > > who is definitely physically attractive based on his/her > > description in the books). The list of the unattractive and > > even repulsive, however, seems endless by comparison. We don't hear anything about the appearance of the Patil twins until the Yule Ball, when they are described as the two best-looking girls in the year (by Seamus, IIRC). This would seem to include all four houses. And frankly, the twins don't come off very well in that episode (although they do come off as typical teenage girls who want their dates to notice them). OTOH, the twins are never depicted as evil, either. And it is not Harry who describes them as good- looking, but another character, so it is possible that he is immune to their charms. (Or just too fixated on Cho.) --Barb Get Psyched Out! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb Chapter 9 of The Time of Good Intentions is Here! http://www.schnoogle.com/authors/barb/TOGI09.html From nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 01:50:30 2001 From: nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com (nancyaw2001 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 01:50:30 -0000 Subject: Weasleys and Harry was Re: Harry's upbringing In-Reply-To: <9uejlf+rl6n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uelp6+qqi2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30605 I, too, have wondered why Dumbledore would leave Harry with the Dursleys. Especially Aunt Marge! Do y'all think that Dumbledore et al were keeping an eye on Harry while he was growing up? Nancy -- In HPforGrownups at y..., meepmeepziptang at h... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "JC" wrote: > JC: > > This brings up an interesting scenario...could the Weasleys be > > considering adopting Harry? It's possible, although I find it to > be > > a bit farfetched. > > > > There's also the question, then, if Ron is jealous of the attention > > Harry receives from his mother. Ron's had to be just another > middle > > child for years, and all of a sudden Harry shows up and gets > > smothered with affection. > > > > Just my 2 Knutes. > > > > --jc > > I would love for the Weasleys to adopt Harry, but for some reason I > don't see him leaving the Dursleys. Why would Dumbledore keep Harry > there, in those horrible conditions, for his enitre childhood if > there wasn't some purpose in it? And I don't totally buy the idea > that Harry just could not have handled fame as a child and was > therefore better off growing up with his only muggle relatives. > There really must be something else to it. > > Sandi From swman19 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 02:42:18 2001 From: swman19 at yahoo.com (swman19 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 02:42:18 -0000 Subject: Potters In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.0.20011202133944.00e2b860@mail.aracnet.com> Message-ID: <9ueoqa+fsjs@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30606 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., CB wrote: > At 09:32 PM 12/1/01 +0000, you wrote: > >Well, he didn't have only a year, remember, in the first chapter, > >Harry was only a year old. By the time Dumbledore tells Harry he > >lived because of Lily's love, Harry was 12. I guess by then, he had > >it figured out! It also could be that Dumbledore wasn't quite sure that Harry did have such a protection on him in the first place. I bet that once he rushed into the chamber where the Sorcerer's Stone was being held and saw what happened to Quirell and Harry's own recount that Dumbledore finally figured it out and knew why Voldemort couldn't kill Harry when he was a baby. I also agree on the fact that if Dumbledore did know ahead of time, he didn't tell Harry since he didn't want Harry to go around like, "Hey, don't worry about Voldemort. He can't touch me!" Thanks Swman19 From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 03:02:31 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 03:02:31 -0000 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods In-Reply-To: <3C0AAEC1.E32B2644@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ueq07+oqpe@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30607 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Philip Nel wrote: > Dear all: > > Heather (uma) quotes me: > > > > By definition, a prejudice is not justified. The word means to > > judge beforehand, to judge without knowledge. > > > > She then writes: > > > Ah ha, well, now we're teetering into the realms of value > > clarification and the sticky problem of connotation vs denotation. As > > such is off-topic, I'll merely point out that semantic definitions > > *don't,* IMO, dictate the relative social/moral value. "Justified" is > > a bit of a loaded term here. > > Actually, no, we're not headed into these realms. It's not about "connotation vs. denotation." It's about the definition of the word "prejudice." If the list will forgive me from quoting from _Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language_ (1989), the word "prejudice" (as a noun) is defined as follows: "1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason. 2. > any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable. 3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, directed against a racial, religious, or national group. 4. such attitudes considered collectively: 'The war against prejudice is never-ending.' 5. disadvantage resulting from some judgment or action of another: 'a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.' 6. resulting > injury or detriment" (p. 1135). We shall agree to disagree, then. I find it interesting that you didn't use the following example: "to judge Harry solely on the basis of his parents' popularity and the fact that he happened to survive an evil wizard's curse...." I still maintain that the phrase "not justified" implies a value judgment which is improperly applied in the universal sense ("by definition") here. From opaldragonfly at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 03:11:52 2001 From: opaldragonfly at yahoo.com (opaldragonfly at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 03:11:52 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9ueqho+1m79@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30608 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Hollydaze" wrote: > > OAK (Hagrid - before Snapped): > The tree of truth. > It is ancient and wise and has an old spirit. > Oak symbolises wisdom, strength, and endurance. > Oak is extremely versatile and can be used in many areas of magic. > It can be used in spells for protection, strength, success and stability. > > Does anyone else look at that list and find themselves thinking of Dumbledore more than Hagrid? >Yes--This would certainly match Dumbledore and I have many "bets with other fans that D's wand will turn out to be Oak. Hagrid, though, is also a Gryffindor and very strong physically, so the Oak would fit him as well. > > YEW (Voldemort) : The Yew, although an evergreen (immortality), is one of the very few trees that can grow in almost total DARKNESS. This would certainly fit the Dark powers of V. > > Lily's wand is made of willow, well the meaning of willow is to do with dying young and she died pretty young if she was only a maximum age of 23. The only problem here is that Ron's (new) wand is willow too. Maybe we should be worried about Ron even after what JK said about him not dying. The willow is a Healing wood because its bark and wood contains, as discovered "officially" by Bayer in the mid-twentieth century, the basic ingredient of aspitrin: o-acetylsalicylic acid. The Celts and Druids regarded it as a tree of Creativity and Eloquence and seers and actors, poets and other artists used to sit under willows and wait for inspiration. It was also regarded as a wood which was an enemy of all evil forces. > > I couldn't find much on Mahogany as the sites we looked at were all to do with the meaning of British trees to the Celts. Mahogany is not a British tree and so was not mentioned. > All I could find on this was "Anti Lightning". > Yes--the mahogany tree is of the southern hemisphere. A hardwood and a dark reddish wood, supposedly powerful protection agains evil spirits. But, not as powerful as the ebony tree's wood which is the southern hemisphere's match for the oak. > I also looked up some other wand woods that someone mentioned on my own site and came up with the following: > > Ash (Cedric): Intelligent, talented, likes to play with its fate, very reliable and trust-worthy, faithful. > Reliable/trustworthy and Faithful: all characteristics of Hufflepuff and Cedric was a typical Hufflepuff going on Dumbledore's! Speech at the end of book four. Interestingle, snakes cannot cross a ring made of ash wood! Too bad Cedric didn't have a chance to use his wand before he was killed! > > Hornbeam (Krum) I only found this on one site but what I found was rather interesting! "is seldom happy with his/her feelings, mistrusts most people, is never sure of its decisions" sounds quite a bit like Krum really. > Hornbeam is a member of the Carpinus family--maybe that's where we get "carping" from! Also a hardwood of Europe and North America-- simple leaves and smooth bark. Holldaze wrote: The wand instinctively knows what that person is like and will be like so plays to their abilities and allows them to fulfil their potential so to speak. > > HOLLYDAZE!!! > >No question about it! JKR carefully researched these woods so that their powers would reflect on the nature of their owners! Since I teach HP symbolism in my literature course, I also researched many of these wand woods and found very similar info to yours! Just added a couple of points! Opal Dragonfly > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nethilia at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 03:14:51 2001 From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Tasha--Nethilia) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:14:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 1451 In-Reply-To: <1007323713.3227.94930.m2@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20011203031451.51776.qmail@web14603.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30609 > From: "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)": > I believe that the > Gryffindors have > Astronomy with the Ravenclaws and that all the > classes that > Gryffindors and Slytherins have together, Ravenclaws > and Hufflepuffs > have together. Which, oddly, is exactly the way I have it in my fic. As for separating us Ravenclaws from the other houses, (*g*) I don't think that would make sense. After all, Hermione has to take Muggle Studies with _someone_. and there's got to be smart people in the other houses. Yes, even smart Hufflepuffs, don't gimme that look. =P --Neth ===== --Nethilia de Lobo-- 79% obsessed with Harry Potter Wand: Dragon Heartstring, Ash, 7 inches **Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.** http://www.geocities.com/spenecial Spenecial.com. Two girls. One Website. Total Chaos. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 03:14:27 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 03:14:27 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3C0A761A.76C1B22F@erols.com> Message-ID: <9ueqmj+rb3j@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30610 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Margaret Dean wrote: > Littlered32773 at y... wrote: > > > > Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to mid > > 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to > > school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? > > > Because he's the only one who would take the job? > > Seriously, it could very well be that the previous Head of > Slytherin House was one of the casualties of Voldy War I. Also, > Snape might have both Dumbledore and influential former DE's like > Malfoy behind his appointment, given his "double agent" status. > This could also be a partial explanation of why Snape favors > Draco Malfoy, if Lucius helped him get the HoH position. Also > why you catch him smirking in CoS when Draco is telling him how > he'll get his dad to push for Snape as Headmaster. > > Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty > =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to > assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an > "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape > =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think > they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you > imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) > > > --Margaret Dean > There is also the prospect that Slytherin has shown itself to accumulate the children *most* likely to be susceptible to Dark propaganda. Snape, as someone who succumbed to that same influence and then came to realize its fatal flaws and turn aside from it, is in an excellent position to recognize the warning signs in the Slytherin kids, and try to subtly counteract those influences. I maintain that the fact that the Slytherin kids took their medicine manfully when the House Cup was swept out of their hands at the end of PS, tends to indicate that Snape may be having at least some sort of a good influence on them. They dish it out, but they seem to understand that they also have to take it from time to time. Heather (uma) From nethilia at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 03:16:50 2001 From: nethilia at yahoo.com (Tasha--Nethilia) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:16:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Eeep! In-Reply-To: <1007323713.3227.94930.m2@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20011203031650.42455.qmail@web14604.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30611 Augh! I'm so sorry! I didn't mean to leave the subject what it was (I get digests). Take 40 points off Ravenclaw for that one. >< Will a detention make up for that! --Neth the apologetic ===== --Nethilia de Lobo-- 79% obsessed with Harry Potter Wand: Dragon Heartstring, Ash, 7 inches **Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.** http://www.geocities.com/spenecial Spenecial.com. Two girls. One Website. Total Chaos. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From Whirdy at aol.com Mon Dec 3 04:40:12 2001 From: Whirdy at aol.com (Whirdy at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:40:12 EST Subject: Werewolf Cubs Message-ID: <15a.508fe36.293c5c2c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30612 Tom Riddle, in describing Hagrid, states he was "trying to raise werewolf cubs under his bed." (CoS) What would be the source of these wonderful beasts as I cannot recall ever hearing or reading of a female werewolf. Would cubs turn into infants the rest of the time? I thought that werewolves didn't think of too much when the moon was full except biting humans. Lupin says he "was a very small boy when he received the bite." (PoA) And how come Lupin didn't run off with the werewolves in the forbidden forest once a month. "There are all sorts of things in there -- werewolves I heard," according to Draco Malfoy. (SS/PS) whirdy From karen at infobreak.net Mon Dec 3 04:42:08 2001 From: karen at infobreak.net (karen at infobreak.net) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 04:42:08 -0000 Subject: Red V. Green In-Reply-To: <20011130215719.24837.cpmta@c000.snv.cp.net> Message-ID: <9uevr0+h4c5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30613 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Delenne wrote: > On the Red V. Green thing, I was wondering if it could be stretched thinly to include the friendly rivalry between Ron with his red hair/maroon sweater against Harry with his green eyes/green Weasley sweater? Any thoughts? > > Delenne How about the not so friendly rivalry between the Green Eyed Harry and the Red Eyed Voldemort? Whose favorite spells are colored red (can't spell it) and green (Avada Kedavra) Karen From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 04:43:32 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:43:32 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Werewolf Cubs Message-ID: <16b.4f29468.293c5cf4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30614 In a message dated 12/2/2001 11:41:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, Whirdy at aol.com writes: > Tom Riddle, in describing Hagrid, states he was "trying to raise werewolf > cubs under his bed." Ok, here's a snippet from a Barnes and Noble chat with JKR; "blaise_42: In Chamber of Secrets, Hagrid is supposed to have raised werewolf cubs under his bed. Are these the same kind of werewolves as Professor Lupin? JR: No. Riddle was telling lies about Hagrid, just slandering him." - Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From karen at infobreak.net Mon Dec 3 05:33:46 2001 From: karen at infobreak.net (karen at infobreak.net) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 05:33:46 -0000 Subject: After the KISS In-Reply-To: <9uc3qs+a2nk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uf2rq+rmeh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30615 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., jspotila at y... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., rucham78 at y... wrote: > But you'll have no sense of self anymore, no memory, no . . . > anything. There's no chance at all of recovery. You'll just exist. > As an empty shell." > > Cheers, > Jennie A "demented" person would likely be someone just going through the motions of existence. If he is in bad enough shape, he might be in a hospital staring into space. Whatever he had that makes him truly alive is gone. Think of someone who has sunk into a permanent state of depression. Depression is what Rowling had in mind when she invented the dementors. Karen From jbailey at rogershsa.com Mon Dec 3 05:37:56 2001 From: jbailey at rogershsa.com (Jason Bailey) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 20:37:56 -0900 Subject: Werewolf Cubs, sneakoscopes & other foreshadowing In-Reply-To: <15a.508fe36.293c5c2c@aol.com> References: <15a.508fe36.293c5c2c@aol.com> Message-ID: <4629182952.20011202203756@rogershsa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30616 Whirdy said: Wac> Lupin says he "was a very small boy when he received the bite." (PoA) And Wac> how come Lupin didn't run off with the werewolves in the forbidden forest Wac> once a month. "There are all sorts of things in there -- werewolves I Wac> heard," according to Draco Malfoy. (SS/PS) I suspect Lupin was the werewolf that was supposedly in the forest. These rumors, like the haunting of the shrieking shack, were probably encouraged by Dumbledore to keep students out of the forbidden forest. There are plenty of things as dangerous as a werewolf in that forest, why squelch the rumors. Personally, I like how JKR does this sort of thing. Introductions of things which will become more relevant in future books (werewolves, dragons, the womping willow, grindelow). So when do we get the vampires, the meaning of "Mars is bright tonight", and Trelawny's first predication. One of my favorites is the sneakoscope. We are introduced to them in PoA, but in GoF they were a big hint that Mad Eye was up to no good. Remember how he tells Harry that he had to disable them due to all the cheating. I'm willing to guess that this was not true...let me clarify, because of course it wasn't true...I don't believe something as light as cheating students will set off a sneakoscope. Even if it did...all the more reason to have one in your classroom. Harry's goes off when ever Scabbers feels the threat of Sirius/Crookshanks...it isn't really malfunctioning as Ron suggests. From liquidfire at mindgate.net Mon Dec 3 02:52:12 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 10:52:12 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape as Head of Slytherin, wand woods, the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <9udq7k+vio4@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011203105212.00797de0@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30617 Littlered wrote: >Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to mid 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to school with James) Actually, no. What if he's the only Slytherin teacher in Hogwarts? It's a possibility, you have to admit. I'm also working under the assumption that HoHs have to come from that particular house, like McGonagall and Gryffindor (PS/SS 16). Assuming I'm correct, I don't see any problems with a thirty year old becoming HoH. Margaret wrote: >Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) The shock will be great, I bet. But then, LV seems to know that Snape has 'left them forever'. That leaves Lucius as the clueless one. Still, if Snape does become Headmaster (whoa!), how long can he hold out against the Dark Forces? I'm pretty sure he's not in the same league as Dumbledore and LV. And no, I just remembered. It seems McGonagall seems to be the next-in-line. She's currently Deputy Headmistress, and she did take over for a short while when Dumbledore was, um, "sacked", back in CS. kichong wrote: >Lily Evans Potter's wand: Willow. The Chinese bodhisattva Guan-Yin holds a willow twig in her hand that symbolizes sacrifice and cycle of life and death. Yep, I'm familiar with Guanyin, I've read a translation of "Journey to the West" (fascinating). To bring everyone up to speed, Guanyin (in Journey) is a protector of sorts to the story's protagonist (the Monkey King), a lesser god coming in aid of mortals. How this relates to Lily Evans Potter is anybody's guess, but I thought it wouldn't hurt you to know. Slightly off-topic: don't you people ever get the feeling that we're being a bit more thorough with our analysis than we should be? But don't get me wrong, I'm fascinated by all of this. Sandi wrote: >I would love for the Weasleys to adopt Harry, but for some reason I don't see him leaving the Dursleys. Why would Dumbledore keep Harry there, in those horrible conditions, for his enitre childhood if there wasn't some purpose in it? And I don't totally buy the idea that Harry just could not have handled fame as a child and was therefore better off growing up with his only muggle relatives. There really must be something else to it. I think this has something to do with that hint I read a loooong time ago that there will be a character in the book that will learn magic late in life. The only prominent muggles I know are the Dursleys. Oh God Forbid, DUDLEY? Besides, I totally agree with the popular notion that the Dursley's residence and Magnolia Cresent is magically protected in more ways than one. Liquidfire From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 03:20:59 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 22:20:59 EST Subject: Neville Questions.... Message-ID: <12d.897c2f9.293c499b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30618 I have a question to ask anyone about Neville Longbottom. I am curious why he is in Gryffindor when he should be in Hufflepuff. He is or can be a brave kid. What happened to him when he was a baby, he must have been younger than Harry when his folks were tortured by the Deatheaters. Was his mom pregnant with him? What was his grandmother like when he was a baby? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jenrose981 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 04:46:20 2001 From: jenrose981 at hotmail.com (Jennifer Kington) Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 23:46:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Werewolf Cubs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30619 JKR said in an interview that Riddle was lying about the werewolf cubs to make Hagrid look bad. Don't ask me which one, but if you hunt around you should find it. This has actually been mentioned here before, so you can look here too. Jen >From: Whirdy at aol.com >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Werewolf Cubs >Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 23:40:12 EST > >Tom Riddle, in describing Hagrid, states he was "trying to raise werewolf >cubs under his bed." (CoS) What would be the source of these wonderful >beasts as I cannot recall ever hearing or reading of a female werewolf. >Would cubs turn into infants the rest of the time? > >I thought that werewolves didn't think of too much when the moon was full >except biting humans. > >Lupin says he "was a very small boy when he received the bite." (PoA) And >how come Lupin didn't run off with the werewolves in the forbidden forest >once a month. "There are all sorts of things in there -- werewolves I >heard," according to Draco Malfoy. (SS/PS) > >whirdy > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From persephone_uk at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 08:06:59 2001 From: persephone_uk at hotmail.com (E S) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 08:06:59 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape as Head of Slytherin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30620 Littlered32773 at yahoo.com wrote: >Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to mid >30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to >school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? It seems that >the other HoH's are much older. We know McGonagall is in her 70's >(again interviews) and I don't see Sprout and Flitwick as much >younger. Given this, and Snape's murkey past (yes, yes, Dumbledore >vouched for him, but he WAS involved with Voldy as far as we know), >doesn't it seem odd that he would be a HoH? I get the feeling that Snape started teaching at Hogwarts fairly soon after Voldemort's downfall and I think it was the very fact that he had once been a Death Eater but had *turned back* that prompted Dumbledore to give him the job. History has shown that Slytherin produces more dark wizards than any other house. Not because the students are necessarily evil, just because the prominent features of their personalities are ambition, cunning and a love of power. Who better then to guide the young Slytherins through a very vulnerable time than one who has walked the path of darkness but found his way back to the light? I know many people have questioned Snape's treatment of the Slytherins and wondered why he favours them if he is truly on Dumbledore's side, but I think what he does is actually very clever. The students in his house trust him, like him and respect him. He has a lot of influence over them. Take Draco for example: from what we have seen, Draco is shaping up to be Lucius II. He is open about his detestation of muggles and mudbloods and has no qualms about publicly declaring his support for Voldemort. But Draco is also only 14 years old and as such is still under the heavy influence of his father. The time may yet come when he has to make the choice, as Dumbledore said, between what is right and what is easy. With Snape around, as a trusted and respected authority figure, it could help him make the right choice. Emily (who believes Snape is really a sweetheart and that there is hope for Draco yet!) "I just met a wonderful new man. He's fictional, but you can't have everything." ~ The Purple Rose of Cairo _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 11:20:12 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 06:20:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville Questions.... Message-ID: <115.8b37757.293cb9ec@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30621 In a message dated 12/3/2001 3:13:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, Jefrigo21 at aol.com writes: > I have a question to ask anyone about Neville Longbottom. I am curious why > he is in Gryffindor when he should be in Hufflepuff. He is or can be a > brave > kid. The kid is most definitely a Gryffindor! He has shown bravery time and time again! In SS he stands up for himself at the end (even if he does get the full-body bind put on him). Also in SS he tries to take on both Crabbe and Goyle at a Quidditch match while Ron fights Malfoy. Then in PoA he is nervous about the boggart but goes up against it anyway. Poor kid doesn't get enough credit. I rather think that he'll end up an unlikely hero - Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 13:38:54 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (Jamie) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 13:38:54 -0000 Subject: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: <9u90dk+o40q@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ufv9e+sbba@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30622 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Jenny Downs" wrote: > I read a JKR interview a few months ago and she was asked about the > evil female character. Apparently she was originally in GoF but JKR > had to cut her out for some reason-maybe it had some thing to do > with the gaping hole she discovered in the plot, or maybe the evil > female made the book too long... > > Jenny I also remember that interview, but I can't remember where it was from....something about a Weasley cousin who was quite wretched, but who had to be cut because she just didn't fit into the plot. I also remember JKR saying something about her being the character who would probably never be. - Jamie From cindysphynx at home.com Mon Dec 3 14:29:35 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 14:29:35 -0000 Subject: Sneakoscopes & other foreshadowing In-Reply-To: <4629182952.20011202203756@rogershsa.com> Message-ID: <9ug28f+b13b@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30623 Jason wrote: > Personally, I like how JKR does this sort of thing. Introductions of > things which will become more relevant in future books (werewolves, > dragons, the womping willow, grindelow). So when do we get the > vampires, the meaning of "Mars is bright tonight", and Trelawny's > first predication. > > One of my favorites is the sneakoscope. I also like the way JKR foreshadows plot twists, including the sneakoscope, which she used twice and which fooled me both times. At this point, the landscape is littered with interesting little devices and gadgets that could pop up at key moments in future books. Harry, Ron and Hermione all still have their omnioculars, for instance. They used them at the QWC, but I have a feeling that they will turn up again. There's also the secrecy sensor. Of the three dark detectors that Fake Moody discussed with Harry, the secrecy sensor is the only one that hasn't played a big role in one of the books. As Jason mentioned, we've seen the sneakoscope twice, and the foe glass was critical in the final confrontation between Fake Moody and Harry. But the secrecy sensor got only a brief mention. Cindy From cindysphynx at home.com Mon Dec 3 14:30:54 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 14:30:54 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <9ueqmj+rb3j@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ug2au+fpqm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30624 > > Littlered32773 at y... wrote: > > > > > > Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to > mid > > > 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to > > > school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? > > > Littlered32773 at y... wrote: > > > > > > Does anyone find it odd that someone as young as Snape (early to > mid > > > 30's according to interviews with JK, and the fact that he went to > > > school with James), could be Head of Slytherin House? > Actually, it doesn't surprise me that Snape has done well professionally. Although I have my reasons for disliking him, you have to admit that he is a very competent wizard who is not easily outsmarted. The trio have tricked him a few times, of course. They created a diversion to steal polyjuice ingredients, for instance. Fake Moody broke into his office, but that was due to Fake Moody's cunning, not an error on Snape's part. But unlike other of my favorite characters (Lupin and Black, for instance), Snape doesn't make many mistakes that I can recall. Sure, he failed to disarm the trio in the Shrieking Shack so that they were in a position to attack him, but he had no reason to think his own students would attack him. So I guess if you are a talented wizard and savvy enough that others don't outsmart you easily, you can be Head of House at a young age. Cindy From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Mon Dec 3 14:49:45 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 14:49:45 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods In-Reply-To: <3C080FFE.B85A7114@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ug3ea+m4ce@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30625 Philip Nel asked: > If I may be so bold as to suggest it, the question that should be asked is not "is this character half-blood or pureblood?" but "what's the significance of asking such a question in the first place?" That is, why does Rowling have certain characters care about magical parentage, when other characters do not care in the least? What assumptions lie behind this concern over purebloods, half-bloods and "mudbloods"? > I concur that this is a much more fruitful question to ask, and there have been many interesting responses. Thank you particularly to Amy for pointing out that there is no mathematical basis for defining half-bloods; in my view the term is meaningless, and the fact that we find it so easy to discuss whether Harry is one is worrying. When Philip Nel added his own answer, he pointed out that "...most people's interest in heritage or lineage remains invisible, unseen most of the time. Malfoy displays his racism and classism openly, but Ron's beliefs about giants only emerge publicly during the scene I mentioned earlier." and Rita noted the importance of fear in fuelling prejudice. I think the case of Ernie Macmillan is interesting in this context. His assertion that he can trace his ancestry back over nine generations of witches and wizards is motivated by his fear that Harry is the Heir of Slytherin, and thinks it will give him some protection. One the one hand, his fear has driven him, however unintentionally, to publicly identify with some of the thinking of the Malfoys and Fudge - descent is important; on the other, he has already absorbed some of this thinking - he comes from a family that is proud of its nine generations (How literally are we to take this? Does he really know about up to 1022 family members? Or does he just trace one branch?) of magical identity. By making his frightened assertion, he has moved a little way in a direction that, if unchecked, will put him in the clutches of Voldemort, however unwillingly. I had not previously paid much attention to the fact that he later apologises to Harry and shakes his hand: for Harry it's not that important. For Ernie, however, it is, and I guess JKR knows it. David From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 15:43:57 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:43:57 -0000 Subject: Ron's Willow - bravery:Good&Evil Message-ID: <9ug6jt+6lhd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30626 We have seen Ron sacrifice himself for Hogwarts/his friends - in book ONE (the chess game) - this is his special bravery. Bravery for the good. The types of bravery: 1) Facing your fears (Neville's excellance). Is a good thing, but overdoing this is may be foolhardy. (Not right to i.e. jump off a plane without paracute just to face your fear of heights) 2) Taking risks - Including facing mortal danger, gambling, rule- breaking, exploring new territory... could be bad or not. Depends on why. 3) Stand up for what is right. (even against friends) that Sometimes follows the rules (Neville trying to stop the Trio); sometimes breaks them (Harry going after Neville's Remembrall Malfoy stole - against teacher's orders). Nothing bad here... 4) The bravery of confession and recieving penalty over a misdeed committed against rules, even when none other knows of it. I think Percy does this! All in all, it is difficult to define right/wrong - because situations arrive when you must choose between two wrongs. Human Rights is a good thing to start. From liquidfire at mindgate.net Mon Dec 3 15:46:57 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 23:46:57 +0800 Subject: Neville Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011203234657.007ab5a0@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30627 Jefrigo21 wrote: >What happened to him (Neville) when he was a baby, he must have been younger than Harry when his folks were tortured by the Deatheaters. Was his mom pregnant with him? One, Neville was a toddler when his folks were tortured. The torturing occured AFTER LV's defeat. Two, a lot has been said about Neville's forgetfullness. Remember the side effects of using too many memory charms on a person, or using a really powerful memory charm for that matter? That person's memory gets damaged. Although for the life of me, if Memory charms have been used on Neville, why does he still know about his parent's torture? Coz I'm assuming that's why he was so freaked out during that fateful first meeting with "Prof. Moody". Unless he was merely freaking out on the curse itself...? And yes, Neville is most definitely a Gryffindor, thank you very much. Although he'd make a good Hufflepuff (and Hermione would make a nice Ravenclaw and harry would do nicely in Slytherin... I'M KIDDING, I'M KIDDING! PUT DOWN THAT WAND!) Liquidfire (Who has just been transfigured into Goyle's knickers) From margdean at erols.com Mon Dec 3 16:27:48 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 11:27:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape as Head of Slytherin References: <3.0.6.32.20011203105212.00797de0@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <3C0BA804.1EE2C223@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30628 Liquidfire wrote: > Margaret wrote: > >Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty > =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to > assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an > "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape > =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think > they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you > imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) > > The shock will be great, I bet. But then, LV seems to know that Snape has > 'left them forever'. Assuming that's who he meant when he said that . . . Rowling leaves that whole passage tantalizingly ambiguous. > That leaves Lucius as the clueless one. Still, if > Snape does become Headmaster (whoa!), how long can he hold out against the > Dark Forces? I'm pretty sure he's not in the same league as Dumbledore and > LV. Maybe not, but he does know how the Death Eaters operate, how they think, etc. He might be able to anticipate a lot of their moves and plan out countermeasures beforehand. > And no, I just remembered. It seems McGonagall seems to be the > next-in-line. She's currently Deputy Headmistress, and she did take over > for a short while when Dumbledore was, um, "sacked", back in CS. Yes, but there was the implication that that was only a short-term measure. Draco seems to think that if Lucius can get Dumbledore sacked, he can get Snape appointed in his place. Not that Draco Malfoy is the world's most reliable source, but it does make sense that the Hogwarts Board of Governors would have to approve a permanent replacement for Dumbledore, and if they want (or are influenced to want) Snape instead of McGonagall, then Snape it would be. And for the reasons stated above, if McGonagall was in Dumbledore's confidence about this, she might not register more than a token protest. If you're going to get the better of those Death Eaters, ya gotta be =sneaky!= :) --Margaret Dean From Lesaja at gmx.de Mon Dec 3 16:13:48 2001 From: Lesaja at gmx.de (Lesaja at gmx.de) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:13:48 -0000 Subject: LV's speech In-Reply-To: <9u8je8+ia4q@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ug8bs+kf07@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30629 Hello all, I'm new here so sorry if I do not tell something new to you. > I really want to hear more about this interesting theory, Bree. > Voldemort's speech is: > > "One, too cowardly to return . . . he will pay. One, who I believe > has left me morever . . . he will be killed, of course . . . and one, > who remains my most faithful servant, and who has already reentered > my service." I think these three are: Karkaroff (who disappeared and left his pupils alone), Sev of cause (the only one who left LV _before_ his fall and worked as a spy for the good guys - that tells Dumbledore) and Crouch Jr, the fake-moody (it has not been discoverd that Moody is not himhelf, when LV says these words.) LesLesAJa From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 16:54:46 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 16:54:46 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloodds In-Reply-To: <9u9008+dhth@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugaom+e0t2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30630 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Megan" wrote: > Harry, is most definitely (IMNSHO) a pureblood, being born to two > full-blown wizards. So would a half-blood and a pureblood make > quater-blood? Does anyone know the rules for this sort of thing? > > -Megan (who has managed to confuse herself) Nope, would still be a half-blood. After all, your (and my) definition of a half-blood as near as we can tell from the books is one wizard parent, one Muggle parents. Apparently, your "blood" only goes back one generation for purposes of determining if you're half- blood, pure-blood or mudblood. Joshua Dyal From rowanbrookt at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 17:03:50 2001 From: rowanbrookt at yahoo.com (rowanbrookt at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:03:50 -0000 Subject: Suitable extract for mini performance.help Message-ID: <9ugb9m+t8u4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30631 Please help. I am looking for a largish section of harry/hermione/ron dialogue to do a small performance. I want it to be funny and of a suitable length to be worth doing. I only want to use those 3 characters if at all possible and i do not mind which book the scene is taken from. Any suggestions because I AM STUMPED. Whats your favourite harry/hermione/ron banter? From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 17:07:39 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:07:39 -0000 Subject: Evil female character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ugbgr+ov7f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30632 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Devika S. Lal" wrote: > If that's true, then I really hope that JKR doesn't introduce the evil > female character in OoP in the form of the new DADA teacher. I would like > to have a good DADA teacher in book 5, considering that only one out of the > four we've had so far has turned out to be "good." > If there's any evil female character introduced in GoF, I would say it was > Mrs. Lestrange (at least, I'm assuming it was Mrs. Lestrange--her name was > never actually mentioned in that scene). Maybe she'll be back in the next > book. > > Devika I doubt that would be the case, if the evil female was truly supposed to end up in GF, then it wouldn't make any sense for her to have come back OP. Chances are they are two separate characters, and with the change in moving the "evil female" to OP, it's just a coincidence that they're both showing up at the same time. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 17:16:06 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:16:06 -0000 Subject: L.O.O.N.: -- Harry's blood status -- Animagi -- Evil female In-Reply-To: <9u9bi5+o4f4@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugc0m+ah1l@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30633 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., caliburncy at y... wrote: > But we also have: > > GOF, Chap. 24, Rita Skeeter's Scoop > [Hagrid to Harry] > "I'd love yeh ter win, I really would. It'd show 'em all . . . > yeh don' have teh be pureblood ter do it." > > So unless Hagrid is also either lying or somehow misunderstands the > criteria for 'blood status' (both of which seem highly unlikely), > then we know Harry is not concerned a pureblood just because both of > his parents are wizards. Ah, good catch. I'll surrender my position now! :) > Are you certain these are one and the same? I have seen interviews > in which JKR has discussed the character she had to take out from GOF > (it was a Weasley cousin, BTW), but I don't remember any implications > that this was also the evil female character JKR had previously > referred to. Do you think you could seek out a link? Because if I > have missed an article then I would love to see it! > > It's quite possible, I suppose, since part of the role of the Weasley > cousin plot-wise was apparently subsumed into the (previously > existing, but then expanded) role of Rita Skeeter, who many consider > to be the evil female character to whom JKR referred. Equally > likely, of course, is the Death Eater woman shown on trial in the > Pensieve that many members guess is Mrs. Lestrange. > > -Luke Assuming the correctness of the salon article, there's no way they could possibly be one and the same. Well, almost no way, at least. The "evil female" would have to be introduced while Crouch Jr was impersonating Moody. For her to then come back as the new DADA teacher would then be a real stretch, unless the characters absolutely have no idea that she's Evil[TM]. Keep in mind that, accepting the reports of this salon article, it's really just a coincidence that these two are being introduced in the same book, so expecting them to be one and the same is extremely unlikely. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 17:20:41 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:20:41 -0000 Subject: Defeating Voldemort, MORE Ravenclaw In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20011201083218.00799d40@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <9ugc99+kv00@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30634 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Liquidfire wrote: > Because the way the books are going, it really seems that LV's demise is > the direction the series is going to take (the question now is 'How?'). > But you're right, there are many ways to do away with LV without having to > kill him. Besides, I don't think he can be killed anyway, not in the usual > sense, at least. A perfect way to dispose of him, it seems to me, is to have a Dementor give him the KISS OF DEATH!! Solves all the problems with his supposed immortality. > We DO know at least one Ravenclaw: Cho Chang. Two, if you count the > so-dashingly named Roger Davies. But you have a point; I want to see more > Ravenclaws! Well, we know OF some Ravenclaws. All we know about Cho's personality is that she seems pretty nice (at least to Harry) so far. That's not really something that we can use as a diagnostic of what the stereotypical Ravenclaw is and how that differs from Hermione. And you forgot one Ravenclaw: Padma Patil! But, alas, we don't really know much about her either. Joshua Dyal From squireandknight at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 17:21:05 2001 From: squireandknight at yahoo.com (Becky) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:21:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville Questions.... In-Reply-To: <12d.897c2f9.293c499b@aol.com> Message-ID: <20011203172105.78104.qmail@web20306.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30635 --- Jefrigo21 at aol.com wrote: > I have a question to ask anyone about Neville > Longbottom. I am curious why > he is in Gryffindor when he should be in Hufflepuff. > He is or can be a brave > kid. > Yes, I think Neville's definitely brave. An interesting point though, is that it is suggested that the Sorting Hat might put you in the house that had the qualities you *valued*. This could make for an interesting analysis on Neville's character. Does he value bravery because it's something he had to be growing up? Or is it because he had his parents descibed as brave to him? Definitely things to consider when thinking about Neville. > What happened to him when he was a baby, he must > have been younger than Harry > when his folks were tortured by the Deatheaters. > Was his mom pregnant with > him? > I don't really see anything in the books to suggest that he was *younger*. My actual impression was that Harry was one of the youngest in his year. If Harry survived Avada Kedavra at fifteen months, then to be in the same year as Harry he'd probably have to be at *least* a year old when his parents were tortured. > What was his grandmother like when he was a baby? > I have absolutely no idea, though I'm kind of inclined to think of her as the typical mother-in-law, disliked by the daughter or son-in-law. Speaking of which, is there anything to suggest if Neville's grandmother is maternal or paternal? I seem to have a hazy memory of her being referred to as "Mrs. Longbottom," but I don't have my books with me to verify that. Becky __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From theboywholived at backteeth.com Mon Dec 3 17:24:43 2001 From: theboywholived at backteeth.com (Gabriel Rozenberg) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:24:43 +0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin, wand woods Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30636 kichong wrote: >Lily Evans Potter's wand: Willow. The Chinese bodhisattva Guan-Yin holds a >willow twig in her hand that symbolizes sacrifice and cycle of life and >death. >Yep, I'm familiar with Guanyin, I've read a translation of "Journey to the >West" (fascinating). To bring everyone up to speed, Guanyin (in Journey) >is a protector of sorts to the story's protagonist (the Monkey King), a >lesser god coming in aid of mortals. How this relates to Lily Evans Potter >is anybody's guess, but I thought it wouldn't hurt you to know. Hi. I know that JKR has said that Lily Potter's maiden name was Evans. But do people on-list think her married name was really Lily Evans Potter? I know that this style has become the norm in the US (Hilary Rodham Clinton, etc) but in the UK it is still pretty unusual for women to turn their maiden name into middle names when they marry. They tend to just swap surnames or increasingly not change them at all. Certainly it would have been v unusual for Lily to have done so in the late 70s. (Even more so her staid, no-nonsense sister.) Gabriel _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From hermione_heidi at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 18:15:19 2001 From: hermione_heidi at hotmail.com (Heidi Henshaw) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 14:15:19 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My Fanfiction Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30637 Hi everyone. If you don't know my name is Heidi Henshaw and although I don't post often(with work and school I don't have much free time) btu I do enjoy reading everyones points of view. The reason I am writing is that I have written and posted on FFnet the first chapter of my Harry Potter story called The Phantom Orb. now if you like reading Fan Fiction I would apperciate it if you would check out the first chapter and tell me what you think. search under authors (Hermione_Heidi) and it will come up. Thanks everyone. Cheers Heidi _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From ladjables at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 18:13:42 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:13:42 -0000 Subject: Harry as Survivor Message-ID: <9ugfcm+nsor@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30638 Hello, I'm new, so I don't know if this has been discussed to death but I would just like to offer some thoughts on who will die [shudder]. I have read some previous posts and while I agree that most of the characters, my beloved Lupin, Sirius and Hargid among others will die, I've always felt certain that Harry will definitely live. I want to say Harry, Ron and Hermione but I don't want to push it. And my reason for saying Harry will survive is simply this: that is who Harry is. Not just a great Seeker, or possibly an all-powerful wizard, but someone who always endures; he is essentially the Boy Who Lived. He has escaped Voldemort on numerous occasions, but he has also toughed it out at the Dursleys and deals with betrayal and ostracism very well. My boy will survive. At what cost I know not. Any thoughts? Could someone convince me that L, S and H will not die? Ladja From Littlered32773 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 18:43:02 2001 From: Littlered32773 at yahoo.com (Littlered32773 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:43:02 -0000 Subject: Neville Questions.... In-Reply-To: <115.8b37757.293cb9ec@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ugh3m+f6rv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30639 > Poor kid doesn't get enough credit. I rather think that he'll end >up an unlikely hero ABSOLUTELY! I am a HUGE Neville fan, and my theory is that something he knows, locked up by a memory charm, is going to be the key to Voldy's downfall. >a lot has been said about Neville's forgetfullness. Remember the >side effects of using too many memory charms on a person, or using a >really powerful memory charm for that matter? That person's memory >gets damaged. >Although for the life of me, if Memory charms have been used on >Neville, why does he still know about his parent's torture? Coz I'm >assuming that's why he was so freaked out during that fateful first >meeting with "Prof. Moody". Unless he was merely freaking out on >the curse itself...? I would think that Neville would know about his parent's torture, even if he is under a memory charm to forget the actual event. He goes to visit them at St. Mungo's, and his family surely had to tell him why his parents were there and why they didn't recognize their own son. It seems (to me, based on the Pensieve) to be common knowledge amoung the older wizards, and I would assume that Neville's family would want to be the ones to tell him, rather than risk him hearing from someone else. It does strike me as peculiar though that the Mr. and Mrs. Weasley have never said anything about it (perhaps to be conveniently overheard). It also stikes me as odd that Draco hasn't used it in some kind of taunt against Neville, as surely his parents must have mentioned it at some point or another. This is, of course, going from my assumption that many of the older wizards know about it. I think he was freaked out for both the reasons you mentioned. He knows that's what was used on his parents, and he sees the results every time he goes to St. Mungos. I think he may have been freaked out by the curse itself, because he was actually 'witnessing' the curse that destroyed his parent's minds. That would freak me out too. Does anyone think that fake Moody/Crouch Jr. might have gotten a little bit of sadistic pleasure out of showing those curses to the kids? He questions Neville as to his parentage, but surely he had to have known who Neville was in advance. How many 14 year old Longbottoms could there be? He only stopped the curse when Hermione yelled at him to do so (IIRC), so could it be that he enjoyed showing the curse off, especially in front of Neville, given that he was allegedly one of the tortures (I use alleged to be fair, but I'm SURE he was in on it!) I think we should start our own Neville fan club. What should we call ourselves? N.I.B.T.A.K.-Neville Is Braver Than Anybody Knows Cheers! Slon From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 18:49:47 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:49:47 -0000 Subject: Scabber's first appearance Message-ID: <9ughgb+24cf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30640 Hi all. Let me start by saying that I honestly tried to research whether or not this question had been posed previously, but it is v. hard to research Scabbers as he has more identities than any other character so far! Anyway here goes... I had picked up SS/PS again this weekend and in the course of rereading, I noticed something that I thought was odd. When we first meet Scabbers, all we know of him is that he is the downtrodden pet of Ron, so when Ron and Harry are confronted by Draco, Crabbe and Goyle on the Hogwarts Express and a scuffle ensues, it does not seem odd that the loyal Weasley family pet would bite the offending future slytherins...however, given that he is actually Peter Pettigrew, nothing if not a lackey to Lord Voldemort, I find it strange that he would attack the son of one of Voldemorts death eaters. (He either bit Crabbe or Goyle, can't remember which, but both of their father's were represented at V.'s gathering in GoF.) Any thoughts on his motivation, or is this not even worthy of mention? Andrea (who does not post very often for fear of not having her facts straight...:) From oppen at cnsinternet.com Mon Dec 3 19:39:36 2001 From: oppen at cnsinternet.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:39:36 -0600 Subject: Oh, my GOD... Message-ID: <001501c17c32$41490cc0$c6c71bce@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 30641 I just saw an article on the web that says that Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone is going to be translated. So what, you ask...it's BEEN translated! Yes, but they're planning to publish it in Latin and Classical Greek! I wanna copy of the Latin edition! From blpurdom at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 19:45:04 2001 From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:45:04 -0000 Subject: OotP Prediction/DADA vs. Evil Female (Was: L.O.O.N. Harry's blood status, etc.) In-Reply-To: <9ugc0m+ah1l@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugko0+9djt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30642 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., raolin1 at h... wrote: > The "evil female" would have to be introduced while Crouch > Jr was impersonating Moody. For her to then come back as the new > DADA teacher would then be a real stretch, unless the characters > absolutely have no idea that she's Evil[TM]. Keep in mind that, > accepting the reports of this salon article, it's really just a > coincidence that these two are being introduced in the same book, > so expecting them to be one and the same is extremely unlikely. I believe Rita Skeeter was in fact the Evil Female, but her brand of evil in GoF will likely be superseded by her behavior in subsequent books, if she appears again (but I really hope Hermione turns her in instead of letting her get away). And I know that we're supposed to have a female DADA teacher in book five, but it seems highly doubtful that she'd be evil. The DADA teachers in books one, two and four were all hiding something. Each did something that could have been fatal to Harry. So far, only Lupin has turned out to be good, and we should have guessed that (those of us who didn't) because he was briefly thought (in the Shrieking Shack) to be evil. (JKR's predilection for red herrings). We're due for a DADA teacher who's not on the Dark side, IMO. Four out of five turning out bad would just make Dumbledore look very stupid. The question is, will JKR attempt to fool us by making her seem highly suspicious at first? Or will the real red herring be to make her seem likable and benevolent all along? --Barb Get Psyched Out! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 19:54:29 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:54:29 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods (long) In-Reply-To: <9uasvs+66f2@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugl9l+2pe9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30643 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote: > Actually, my experience with people like that is that often they feel > *inferior*, saying things like the Jews will take over if we let them in (e.g., a > country club) or if we don't set quotas (e.g., many prestigious colleges in the > not-too-distant past). Remember, the wizarding world is hiding from muggles > because of persecution, As a point of nit-pickiness, we don't actually know that this is why the wizarding world is hidden. Arthur Weasley says it's because wizards don't want to be bothered with coming up with magical solutions for everybodies problems, although that's likely a simplistic view. Joshua Dyal From ftah3 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 19:20:51 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:20:51 -0000 Subject: why Harry lives with the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20011203105212.00797de0@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <9ugjaj+lhep@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30644 Sandi wrote: > >I would love for the Weasleys to adopt Harry, but for some reason I > don't see him leaving the Dursleys. Why would Dumbledore keep Harry > there, in those horrible conditions, for his enitre childhood if > there wasn't some purpose in it? And I don't totally buy the idea > that Harry just could not have handled fame as a child and was > therefore better off growing up with his only muggle relatives. > There really must be something else to it. In GoF, LV states that he couldn't get at Harry while Harry lived with the Dursleys because Dumbledore had done something so that Harry would be protected so long as he resided with blood relatives. Don't have the tome with me, so I can't quote a page number, but it's toward the end, during one of Voldemort's monologues to the Death Eaters, before he and Harry duel. And I had thoughts about the themes of blood relationships, but I typed them out and then my PC ate the post. So...nevermind. :) Dana From lisa.calandriello at fallon.com Mon Dec 3 19:54:24 2001 From: lisa.calandriello at fallon.com (lisa.calandriello at fallon.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:54:24 -0000 Subject: hello! new here.... Message-ID: <9ugl9g+71d9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30645 Hello, all! I'm new here & just wanted to introduce myself & find out more about the group. What, if anything, would you like to tell me about the kinds of people & topics to expect? FYI, I'm 36, have read all books twice, except for Goblet of Fire, which I'm re-reading now. I work at an advertising agency in NYC, but I don't do advertising (work in our global expansion office -- we're an office of 2!) Block & a half fron "Ground Zero" so HP is a welcome bit of fantasy in my day. Good to be here! From pandrea13 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 19:55:27 2001 From: pandrea13 at yahoo.com (pandrea13 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:55:27 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Transfiguration Message-ID: <9uglbf+u9mc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30646 Hi! I am new to this group and maybe you guys have already discussed this question but I was re-reading COS and in it, it says that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher. Does this mean that he can turn into an animal(maybe Fawkes)? McGonagall can so maybe he can too. From susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 19:55:42 2001 From: susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com (susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:55:42 -0000 Subject: Ron & Dumbledore Message-ID: <9uglbu+5kuj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30647 Hi- I'm new here, so I apologize if this theory is off-the-wall, or has already been discussed. I've been re-reading the HP books, and noticed the physical similarities between Ron & Dumbledore. Both were tall and thin. Both had red hair (although Dumbledore's has turned white with age) and both had long noses. Also, Dumbledore seemed to know things only Ron and Harry should know. Given that time travel and dual identities are possible, could Ron have been sent back in time to establish a new identity (Dumbledore) and position himself to guide Harry through his battles with Voldemort? Is there anything in the text that rules this out? I've been trying to find out what color Ron's eyes are, but I haven't been able to find any reference to it. (This seems unusual, given that JKR mentions other characters' eye colors frequenty) Any thoughts? Susan From lisa.calandriello at fallon.com Mon Dec 3 19:59:28 2001 From: lisa.calandriello at fallon.com (lisa.calandriello at fallon.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:59:28 -0000 Subject: Harry as Survivor In-Reply-To: <9ugfcm+nsor@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30648 Interesting point & well-taken. Besides that, if memory serves, the hero rarely dies an untimely at the end of any epic. I'm wary of who will die. When Ms. Rowling said a "beloved character" would die in GOF, I was certain it would be Ron, Hagrid, or Dumbledore & I was almost afraid to read on. When I saw who it was I was almost disappointed because I didn't consider that character to be "beloved" at all. I certainly didn't hate him, but it was more that I had no opinion of him whatsoever. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ladjables at y... wrote: > Hello, > I'm new, so I don't know if this has been discussed to death but I > would just like to offer some thoughts on who will die [shudder]. I > have read some previous posts and while I agree that most of the > characters, my beloved Lupin, Sirius and Hargid among others will > die, I've always felt certain that Harry will definitely live. I > want to say Harry, Ron and Hermione but I don't want to push it. > > And my reason for saying Harry will survive is simply this: that is > who Harry is. Not just a great Seeker, or possibly an all-powerful > wizard, but someone who always endures; he is essentially the Boy Who > Lived. He has escaped Voldemort on numerous occasions, but he has > also toughed it out at the Dursleys and deals with betrayal and > ostracism very well. My boy will survive. At what cost I know not. > Any thoughts? Could someone convince me that L, S and H will not die? > Ladja From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 20:03:35 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:03:35 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <9ub3fp+v457@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uglqn+urum@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30649 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Bill" wrote: > I would be interested in some thoughts on where Peeves fits into the > above. Sounds about right. We already know from the scene in which Harry and co. first meet the ghosts (while waiting to be sorted) that Peeves isn't really a proper ghost at all, and that he's the only ghost with with color. Obviously, he's a very different kind of creature than -- for example -- Nearly Headless Nick. Joshua Dyal From breegenie at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 20:04:24 2001 From: breegenie at yahoo.com (Bree) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:04:24 -0000 Subject: ancient magic & Dumbledore WAS Potters In-Reply-To: <9ubg87+39et@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugls8+56bd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30650 In SS/PS, Dumbledore claims ignorance about how Harry survived. That may not have been the case. He probably knew this "ancient magic," since he is probably the same person who invokes the ancient magic that protects Harry under his family's care (or was it Lily, the charms expert...) But Dumbledore didn't exactly want LV to know what was protecting Harry, and it worked, sort of. It took LV 13 years, plus close contact in SS to figure it out. This begs this the questions of why wouldn't he share with McGonagall? The result of years of being cautious because of LV? Just because everyone is celebrating doesn't mean Dumbledore is ready to take risks. Bree (who wonders what "ancient magic" JKR still has up her sleeve) Hayes wrote: In the first chapter, Dumbledore does say that he has no idea how Harry survived. And yet, by the final chapter of SS, Dumbledore is able to give Harry an answer about how he lived (i.e. Lily's love). How did he figure this out in the course of a year at Hogwarts? lbuske at y... wrote: Well, he didn't have only a year, remember, in the first chapter, Harry was only a year old. By the time Dumbledore tells Harry he lived because of Lily's love, Harry was 12. I guess by then, he had it figured out! From Joanne0012 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 20:12:36 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:12:36 -0000 Subject: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods (long) In-Reply-To: <9ugl9l+2pe9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugmbk+d2jj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30651 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., raolin1 at h... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote: >> Remember, the wizarding world is hiding >> from muggles > > because of persecution, > > As a point of nit-pickiness, we don't actually know that this is why > the wizarding world is hidden. Arthur Weasley says it's because > wizards don't want to be bothered with coming up with magical > solutions for everybodies problems, although that's likely a > simplistic view. I think Arthur is protecting the kids when he says this. If you don't have access to a copy of Bagshot's "History of Magic,": you can check page xv of "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them" for a discussion of "the dark days that preceded wizards' retreat into hiding" that led to the summit of 1692 and the resulting International Code of Wizarding Secrecy. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 20:14:32 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:14:32 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw & classes In-Reply-To: <20011201215029.72829.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ugmf8+bd21@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30652 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Klawzie wrote: > Well, Ravenclaws are supposed to be the very smart > ones, right? What if they're kept seperate so as not > to "slow down" their learning processes? Just because the "clever" ones are sorted into Ravenclaw would hardly make them such uber-geniuses that they can't even take classes with the rest of the school! After all, it's not a Ravenclaw, but Hermione who is the top of all the classes. Joshua Dyal From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Mon Dec 3 20:19:51 2001 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (Milz) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:19:51 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore and Transfiguration In-Reply-To: <9uglbf+u9mc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugmp7+g3l5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30653 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., pandrea13 at y... wrote: > Hi! > > I am new to this group and maybe you guys have already > discussed this question but I was re-reading COS and in it, it > says that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher. Does > this mean that he can turn into an animal(maybe Fawkes)? > McGonagall can so maybe he can too. Welcome. We've speculated before if Dumbledore was a registered animagus like McGonagall. He could be, but until he transfigures into something or until Hermione looks him up in an earlier Ministry Registery, we'll never know. We've also speculated about what kind of animal Dumbledore would be if he were an animagus. Loads of speculation on that, including a "bee" because dumbledore is an archaic term for "bumblebee". Personally, I do think Dumbledore is an animagus. In SS/PS, he tells Harry that the owl and he must have past each other mid-air. Granted Dumbledore could have been flying a broomstick, but would he risk flying during the daylight? Even if he was wearing an invisibility cloak or was under some invisibility spell, I don't think flying would have been prudent or as convenient as the Floo System or a portkey. It would be interesting to see if Dumbledore is an animagus or not. It would answer some questions about him. Milz From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 3 20:32:00 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:32:00 -0000 Subject: Oh, my GOD... In-Reply-To: <001501c17c32$41490cc0$c6c71bce@hppav> Message-ID: <9ugng0+mupg@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30654 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Eric Oppen" wrote: > I just saw an article on the web that says that Harry Potter and the > Philosopher's Stone is going to be translated. So what, you ask...it's BEEN > translated! > > Yes, but they're planning to publish it in Latin and Classical Greek! > > I wanna copy of the Latin edition! There are many whimsical classisists out there. You can get a Latin translation of Alice in Wonderland at: http://www.gmu.edu/departments/fld/CLASSICS/alice.html and Looking Glass' Jabberwocky at: http://www.gmu.edu/departments/fld/CLASSICS/iabervocius.html The songs of Elvis Presley and Winnie-the-Pooh have also been Latinized (though they're not online). - CMC From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 20:34:21 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:34:21 -0000 Subject: Elves, goblins, etc., was Re: Mudbloods In-Reply-To: <3C09B345.D79EDF64@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ugnkd+cfjj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30655 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Philip Nel wrote: > Like Amanda's husband, I, too, suspect that the goblins -- and the house-elves -- will play crucial roles in future books. As to what the goblins are rebelling against, I was inferring that goblins are permitted to work only in certain areas of the wizarding world. That is, they seem to be relegated to particular professions -- money- lending, primarily. I'm not an expert on > the history of Jews in Europe, but there seems to be a parallel between the goblins' status and the status of Jews in Europe during certain periods of history (I'm inclined to say the 17th and 18th centuries, but I could well be wrong). So, I would imagine that the goblins have legitimate reasons to rebel against their liminal status. No, much earlier. It was a dictate of the Medieval Catholic church that charging "usury" -- then defined as interest -- was un- Christian, therefore Christians were never money-lenders. I think it's a bit of a jump to say that the goblins are the Jews of the wizarding world, though. Just because we know they run Gringotts, it doesn't follow that they are restricted to that profession. We don't know what the goblin rebellions were about. Since they seem to have happened hundreds of years ago -- from the few dates we are given -- mapping them to current issues with goblin/wizard relations is probably futile anyway. > > And a question--when a prejudice is valid, is it still prejudice? > By definition, a prejudice is not justified. The word means to judge beforehand, to judge without knowledge. Well, yes and no. A prejudice may very well be justified. The definition of prejudice is 1) injury or damage resulting from some judgement or action of another in disregard of one's rights; esp.: detriment to one's legal rights or claims 2) preconcieved judgement or opinion; an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge. Justification does not come into play. In the case of Remus Lupin, it is not a case of prejudice, because it *is* well-known that werewolves are dangerous: Lupin himself admits it, and his transformation in front of the children bears it out. Sure, Lupin is a nice guy, and he took pretty good precautions, but after he slips up, even he admits that he cannot allow himself to be in a position where it could happen again, so he resigns. He does *not* say that he resigns because of pressure from Hogwarts' students' parents. Joshua Dyal From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Mon Dec 3 20:40:31 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:40:31 -0500 Subject: Female DADA teacher.... References: <1007409614.2283.53915.m8@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0BE33F.904CD41B@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30656 I vote for Molly Weasley as the mysterious female DADA teacher. Talk about plot twists and red herrings... it sure would be a surprise to Ron, as well. (Suddenly a scene from a Simpson's Halloween episode flashes to mind: Marge is revealed as the evil head vampire, and points out to the shocked kids, "I do have a life outside this house, you know." :) Ok, I know that's a pretty big leap, even for JKR. Actually, my money's on Arabella Figg, secret guardian of young Harry and breeder of world-champion kneazles. ;) Elizabeth (who actually had a dream this morning just before waking, in which she was sorted into Ravenclaw... ok, time to read something else before bed....) From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 20:44:31 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:44:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Scabber's first appearance Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30657 In a message dated 12/3/2001 1:54:35 PM Eastern Standard Time, dsslouisville at yahoo.com writes: > however, given that he is actually Peter Pettigrew, > nothing if not a lackey to Lord Voldemort, I find it strange that he > would attack the son of one of Voldemorts death eaters. > Any thoughts on his motivation, or is this not even worthy of mention? I think it may either one of two possible reasons. IIRC, Voldemort describes Peter as a faithful servant. Peter may have been thinking along the lines of Barty Jr. in thinking that he was faithful to his master and above the rest of the Death Eaters. This is probably unlikely though, as I think Peter is saner that Barty Jr was and he doesn't seem to be a willing servant. The more likely reason is that Peter was a rat and therefore had a rat brain. He wouldn't have known Draco before Voldemort fell because Draco was a baby then and Peter hadn't shown his true colors. As a rat in PS/SS the name Malfoy would mean nothing to him as his rat brain wouldn't have been able to recall much about it. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lucy at luphen.co.uk Mon Dec 3 20:47:38 2001 From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:47:38 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore and Transfiguration References: <9uglbf+u9mc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <00fe01c17c3b$bed920e0$53af1e3e@stephen> No: HPFGUIDX 30658 >Hi! I am new to this group and maybe you guys have already discussed this question but I was re-reading COS and in it, it says that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher. Does this mean that he can turn into an animal(maybe Fawkes)? >McGonagall can so maybe he can too. Hi Pandrea! I'm afraid there's no way that Dumbledore could turn into Fawkes, as they are seen together several times in CoS and GoF. Turning into some other sort of creature might be fun though. Perhaps he's the Eagle Owl people keep spotting during the books - so it's not evil at all! (No, OK, just a thought! ) Lucy (back to catching up with emails now!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 20:52:23 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:52:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mudbloods, Halfbloods, and Purebloods (long) Message-ID: <3b.1e56fdc4.293d4007@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30659 In a message dated 12/3/2001 2:57:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, raolin1 at hotmail.com writes: > As a point of nit-pickiness, we don't actually know that this is why > the wizarding world is hidden. Arthur Weasley says it's because > wizards don't want to be bothered with coming up with magical > solutions for everybodies problems, although that's likely a > simplistic view. > > Joshua Dyal It has been said by Professor Binns that the Founders built Hogwarts away from muggles to avoid muggles who wanted to peresecute witches. One can safely assume that from this statement and various others that *one* of (many, I'm sure) reasons for hiding from muggles is the witch hunt hysterias of the past. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 20:56:57 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:56:57 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron & Dumbledore Message-ID: <161.4fa2cc4.293d4119@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30660 In a message dated 12/3/2001 3:02:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com writes: > Given that time travel and dual identities are > possible Actually, we have no idea if time travel that far back is possible. We know you can travel back a few hours with a time-turner but we haven't the slightest idea if there's a magical object that allows further transport into the past. However, I think it may be possible that Dumbledore is a distant relative of the Weasleys. The similiarities in appearance have occurred to me before too. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 21:00:10 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:00:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Elves In-Reply-To: <9ueem1+4oqe@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011203210010.62572.qmail@web20809.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30661 --- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Someone in HPfGU did some > research in Muggle folklore and found that the > familiar Brownie > Household Elf is called a Dobby someplace in > England. This > researcher, finding that Muggle tradition holds that > Dobbies, > Brownies, and the like leave homes that disrespect > them, such as by > leaving big messes for them to clean up, or not > putting out bowls of > milk for them, concluded that some one has cast a > spell on all the > House Elves, something like a generational inherited > Imperius Curse, > to override their free will and destroy their > ability to leave a > place where they are being abused. She said what > House Elves need is > to have the Curse removed, not to have some human > form a union to > demand pensions for them. I think that somebody may have been me :) I do remember arguing that treating House-elves like they're just short Human beings with funny ears is a major mistake. They are magical creatures very different with needs and desires, a fact which *must* be addressed if their position in Wizarding society is to be improved. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 21:01:15 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:01:15 -0000 Subject: Harry as Survivor In-Reply-To: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugp6r+j1et@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30662 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., lisa.calandriello at f... wrote: > Interesting point & well-taken. Besides that, if memory serves, the > hero rarely dies an untimely at the end of any epic. I'm wary of who > will die. When Ms. Rowling said a "beloved character" would die in > GOF, I was certain it would be Ron, Hagrid, or Dumbledore & I was > almost afraid to read on. When I saw who it was I was almost > disappointed because I didn't consider that character to be "beloved" > at all. I certainly didn't hate him, but it was more that I had no > opinion of him whatsoever. Well, see that's where you're wrong. The "beloved character" isn't Cedric Diggory at all: it's Frank Bryce! And when JKR says "beloved character" she isn't referring to a major character whom the readers all love, she's referring to the crotchety old gardener who was injured in the war and is falsely accused of murder, which is a beloved character archetype! So see, she was completely consistent with the death of a "beloved character" -- from a certain point of view. Joshua Dyal From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 21:02:35 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:02:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore and Transfiguration Message-ID: <183.14efec.293d426b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30663 In a message dated 12/3/2001 3:02:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, pandrea13 at yahoo.com writes: > I am new to this group and maybe you guys have already > discussed this question but I was re-reading COS and in it, it > says that Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher. Does > this mean that he can turn into an animal(maybe Fawkes)? > McGonagall can so maybe he can too. That is an interesting speculation! Certainly any good Transfiguration teacher can turn into an animagi. He definitely isn't Fawkes though, as he and Fawkes have been in the same room before. Hm...It seems unlikely that we'll come across many more animagi as we already know of five, four of whom are illegal. Besides, IIRC, Hermione said there were only *7* registered animagi in the whole *century*....That leaves only 6 for the last 100 years Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From egility at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 20:30:36 2001 From: egility at yahoo.com (egility at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:30:36 -0000 Subject: Spouses Message-ID: <9ugndc+82ij@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30664 In her BBC online chat (for transcript see http://www.t35.com/hol/c118.htm) JKR mentions that a few of the professors have or had spouses but that this information is "sort of restricted" and that we would find out why. Is there, or has there been, any speculation as to who has/had a spouse and why this would be restricted info? It is not clear whether she meant it was restricted from the Hogwart's students or that she simply would not talk about it in the interview. Chris:) From egility at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 20:02:35 2001 From: egility at yahoo.com (egility at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 20:02:35 -0000 Subject: OotP Prediction/DADA vs. Evil Female (Was: L.O.O.N. Harry's blood status, etc.) In-Reply-To: <9ugko0+9djt@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uglor+10o8i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30665 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Barb" wrote: > And I know that we're supposed to > have a female DADA teacher in book five, but it seems highly > doubtful that she'd be evil. I made the same inferrence once and was politely corrected. JKR stated there would be a female DADA teacher in the future, but she did not say it would necessarily be in Book 5 - could be 6 or 7. See http://www.t35.com/hol/c107.htm for a transcript. My pet theory though is that Mrs. Figg will turn up at some point in Book 5 as the DADA instructor. Oh, and she will not be evil. Regards, Chris:) From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 21:12:36 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:12:36 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3C0A761A.76C1B22F@erols.com> Message-ID: <9ugps4+59s3@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30666 >> Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty >> =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to >> assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an >> "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape >> =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think >> they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you >> imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) In response to this statement, specifically Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore and Dumblebore's trust in Snape (referred to both in GoF and referenced in this theory that they may have an "understanding"), I wonder why has Dumbledore never given Snape the position that Snape so obviously covets...the DADA position? Could it be that Dumbledore is not quite so confident that, given a forum as controversial as that one seems to be, Snape would use it in a responsible manner? I am not a huge Snape fan, and must say that I am slightly disturbed everytime that he blatantly abuses his power intimidate and harass Gryffindors. You would never see the another HoH, such as McGonagall, threaten to poison someone's pet by testing their schoolwork on it. I think the question is why does Dumbledore allow the harassment unchecked on Gryffindor, esp. HRH and N? Is he trying to toughen them up for the upcoming battle? Has he given Snape instructions to this end? Andrea (who is forsaking lurkdom today for some unknown reason...) From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 21:14:37 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:14:37 -0000 Subject: ancient magic & Dumbledore WAS Potters In-Reply-To: <9ugls8+56bd@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugpvt+7n4u@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30667 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Bree" wrote: > In SS/PS, Dumbledore claims ignorance about how Harry survived. That > may not have been the case. He probably knew this "ancient magic," > since he is probably the same person who invokes the ancient magic > that protects Harry under his family's care (or was it Lily, the > charms expert...) I wonder if this "ancient magic" really has anything to do with the day to day magic the wizards normally use. In old folklore, and in some modern fantasies as well, magic is something deep and internal: it's not something that can be invoked, or so easily learned: it is just a natural part of who you are, or a direct result of some "cosmic law." I don't think that Lily Potter invoked any ancient magic, or that Harry did so either as he saved Wormtail -- in fact, we know for a fact that the latter is true. Therefore, the "ancient magic" is something above and beyond wizarding magic: you don't cast it as a spell, or anything like that, it just happens if circumstances are right. Joshua Dyal From cindysphynx at home.com Mon Dec 3 21:15:55 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:15:55 -0000 Subject: Animagus - Pettigrew - DADA - (WAS Dumbledore and Transfiguration) In-Reply-To: <9ugmp7+g3l5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugq2b+hej0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30668 Milz wrote: > It would be interesting to see if Dumbledore is an animagus or not. > It would answer some questions about him. > It would be interesting to know if we'll find out about more animagi. I think, however, that we've pretty much reached the point where there will be a groan heard 'round the world if JKR pulls another animagus out of her hat. We might need a new group here. Instead of a support group, maybe it would be an advocacy group committed to the idea of having no one else turn out to be an animagus, although it would be OK if one of the students decided to try to learn this trick over the next three books. Maybe S.T.O.W.I.C. [Stop Turning Our Wizards Into Creatures]? Calypso wrote: >The more likely reason is that Peter was a rat and therefore had a rat brain. > He wouldn't have known Draco before Voldemort fell because Draco was a baby > then and Peter hadn't shown his true colors. As a rat in PS/SS the name > Malfoy would mean nothing to him as his rat brain wouldn't have been able to > recall much about it. > I think Peter used his defense of Ron in PS/SS as a reason for Ron to spare his life in PoA. In the Shrieking Shack, Peter calls himself "a good pet," a "good friend." Given that Sirius tells us that Peter would never to anything to advance the dark side unless he thought there was something in it for him, it makes some sense that Peter (rat-sized brain or not) figured it made more sense to be a loyal rat to Ron than not. Barb wrote: > We're due for a DADA teacher who's not on the Dark side, IMO. Four > out of five turning out bad would just make Dumbledore look very > stupid. The question is, will JKR attempt to fool us by making her > seem highly suspicious at first? Or will the real red herring be to > make her seem likable and benevolent all along? I wonder if the DADA teacher in OoP will be . . . just the DADA teacher, for a change. Setting aside Lupin, we've had a procession of increasingly evil DADA teachers. It will be very difficult for any subsequent DADA teacher to surpass Crouch/Moody in evilness. A moderately evil DADA teacher would be a disappointment at this point. So maybe it's time to retire the DADA-teacher surprise and look elsewhere for the Big Plot Twist. I wonder, though, what kind of stock personalities remain for a convincing DADA teacher. We've had Quirrel-the-Non-Entity. Lockhart- the-Incompetent. Lupin-the-Terrific. Moody-the-Terrific-Who-Was- Actually-Evil. Maybe the DADA teacher could be really mean, but Snape already fills that role. I'm running out of ideas. Maybe Karkaroff-the-Unctuous-Reformed-Traitor? Elizabeth wrote: > I vote for Molly Weasley as the mysterious female DADA teacher. Talk about plot > twists and red herrings... it sure would be a surprise to Ron, as well. If you want plot twists, red herrings, and turning a plot element on its head, how about Winky as the DADA teacher? She's off the butterbeer, she needs a job, house elves have powerful magic, Hermione would be pleased. . . . Anyone? No? Yeah, you're right. Having Winky be the new DADA teacher is just way, way too much. Cindy From feycat at feycat.net Mon Dec 3 21:18:43 2001 From: feycat at feycat.net (Gabriel Edson) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:18:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as Head of Slytherin References: <9ugps4+59s3@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <045501c17c40$16d20ba0$0b01a8c0@enet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30669 >>I wonder why has Dumbledore never given Snape the position that Snape so obviously covets...the DADA position? << I've always been under the opinion that it is known by some that Snape was a DE at one point. Parents can't trust a werewolf, I don't think many of them would be enthusiastic to see a DE - former or not - as a DADA teacher. Gabriel Pack House Quidditch Team Keeper "Twitchy little ferret, aren't you Malfoy?" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eleri at aracnet.com Mon Dec 3 16:34:45 2001 From: eleri at aracnet.com (CB) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 11:34:45 -0500 Subject: MArs In-Reply-To: <1007382984.1052.31880.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.0.20011203113115.00b35100@mail.aracnet.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30670 Jason said: >the meaning of "Mars is bright tonight", Astrologicaly speaking, that's really easy. Mars is the symbol of war and conflict (thus being named after the God of War, for it's *RED* colour!) The centaurs noting how bright Mars is their way of trying to warn the obtuse humans that Bad Things are going to start happening, without coming out and really telling them. Of course none of the humans acutaly pick up on the clue (can you hear the spooky obtuse human music? I can.) Doesn't Hogwarts have an Astrology class, or is that something that's strictly limited to the centaurs? Eleri Eleri Hamilton Chronological Grownup "Honestly woman, and you call yourself our mother!" From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 21:28:33 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:28:33 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <045501c17c40$16d20ba0$0b01a8c0@enet.com> Message-ID: <9ugqq1+ijbd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30671 > I've always been under the opinion that it is known by some that Snape was a DE at one point. Parents can't trust a werewolf, I don't think many of them would be enthusiastic to see a DE - former or not - as a DADA teacher. But the fact remains that Dumbledore has put his convictions on the line before, the fact that he hired Lupin, despite his "affliction" and despite what people would have thought, means that he obviously has no problem with an unpopular decision, even one some people would think was dangerous. IIRC, at the end of PoA, he would have championed Lupin to keep his position. It would seem to me to be out of character for Dumbledore not to fight for Snape if he trusted and respected him. Andrea From Dar20 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 21:32:27 2001 From: Dar20 at aol.com (Darlene) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:32:27 -0000 Subject: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition and other newbie musings Message-ID: <9ugr1b+m735@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30672 So, just the other day I received my very own copies of the UK editions of the series. I have read the US editions twice (borrowed.. guess I'll have to buy my own copies!). I'm wondering, WHY are there two editions? Did the US publisher think we would not be interested in reading the UK version? Is this a common thing to do? Why did Chris Columbus then make two versions of the movie. Seems silly to me. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it just as much if they said "Philosopher's" instead of "Sorcerer's". Also, why, in the US edition, are things changed? To the point of being errors? For instance, after Harry is sorted, the US version says there are 3 students remaining, when in fact there are four (the addition of Dean)? Perhaps... they know that suckers like me will be looking to buy the US and UK versions... hmmm... they could make a killing when this thing comes out on DVD. Amazon.uk here I come! Dar From margdean at erols.com Mon Dec 3 22:11:24 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:11:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Poltergeists References: <9uglqn+urum@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0BF88C.E6D4946A@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30673 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Bill" wrote: > I would be interested in some thoughts on where Peeves fits into > the above. I had an off-the-wall idea: what if a poltergeist is what happens when a house-elf dies? --Margaret Dean From Calypso8604 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 21:49:47 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:49:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Poltergeists Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30674 In a message dated 12/3/2001 4:47:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, margdean at erols.com writes: > > I would be interested in some thoughts on where Peeves fits into > > the above. > > I had an off-the-wall idea: what if a poltergeist is what > happens when a house-elf dies? > > I would say, no wonder they are so annoying! If I were a house-elf ghost I would make myself a huge pain in the butt, too! Make up for all those years of all work, no fun. ^_^ Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 21:55:42 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:55:42 -0000 Subject: Spouses In-Reply-To: <9ugndc+82ij@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugscu+s1ak@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30675 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., egility at y... wrote: > In her BBC online chat (for transcript see > http://www.t35.com/hol/c118.htm) JKR mentions that a few of the > professors have or had spouses but that this information is "sort of > restricted" and that we would find out why. > > Is there, or has there been, any speculation as to who has/had a > spouse and why this would be restricted info? It is not clear > whether she meant it was restricted from the Hogwart's students or > that she simply would not talk about it in the interview. > > Chris:) Obviously the biggest speculation surrounds Severus Snape; this might possibly have something to do with JKR's whimsical response to the question of whether he had/would ever fall in love. (For those who don't know, she replied, "I'm shocked that you'd ask that," and implied that the answer would be forthcoming within the series.) Hrm... I'm liking the idea that his leaving the Death Eaters was over some woman he loved, although I vehemently reject the notion that that woman was Lily. Maybe he was married in his 20s? From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 22:05:44 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:05:44 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <9ugps4+59s3@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugsvo+i3mt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30676 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., dsslouisville at y... wrote: > > >> Tangential to this: assuming that Snape's fundamental loyalty > >> =is= to Dumbledore (which as a Snapefan of sorts, I do tend to > >> assume), I wonder if he and Dumbledore actually have an > >> "understanding" that if anything does happen to Dumbledore, Snape > >> =will= become Headmaster, therefore letting the DE's and LV think > >> they have achieved a victory when they in fact haven't. Can you > >> imagine how horrified the Trio would be? :) > > In response to this statement, specifically Snape's loyalty to > Dumbledore and Dumblebore's trust in Snape (referred to both in GoF > and referenced in this theory that they may have an "understanding"), > I wonder why has Dumbledore never given Snape the position that Snape > so obviously covets...the DADA position? Could it be that Dumbledore > is not quite so confident that, given a forum as controversial as > that one seems to be, Snape would use it in a responsible manner? Ah ha! You've been taken in like so many others. The idea that Snape wants the DADA position is an example of what we might in this context call "received wisdom." Our only source for this alleged ambition of Snapes is a comment from Percy Weasley during the Welcoming Feast during PS. No adult has ever suggested that Snape wants the job, and in fact Hagrid reveals that the only reason Dumbledore gave the vacated DADA job to Gilderoy Lockhart is that *Lockhart was the sole applicant.* Snape might want the job, but fan consensus is largely that this is merely a student perception. You *cannot* take everything the students say as gospel. From fordpr1020 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 21:57:46 2001 From: fordpr1020 at aol.com (JC) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:57:46 -0000 Subject: Neville In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20011203234657.007ab5a0@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <9ugsgq+9j6f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30677 > Jefrigo21 wrote: Two, a lot has been said about Neville's > forgetfullness. Remember the side effects of using too many memory charms > on a person, or using a really powerful memory charm for that matter? That > person's memory gets damaged. My 2 Knutes on the issue is that Neville may very well be repressing everything magical about himself - he saw what happened to his parents and feels that if he becomes too good of a wizard that the same may come back to haunt him. It's a crude defense mechanism, but it works. --jc From meboriqua at aol.com Mon Dec 3 22:17:36 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:17:36 -0000 Subject: House Elves In-Reply-To: <20011203210010.62572.qmail@web20809.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ugtm0+q3mj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30678 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch < I do remember arguing that treating House-elves like they're just short Human beings with funny ears is a major mistake. They are magical creatures very different with needs and desires, a fact which *must* be addressed if their position in Wizarding society is to be improved.> I know we've discussed this one to death, but I can't stop myself from jumping in whenever elves come up. I agree with you that elves may very well have different needs than humans as well as different perspectives on things. Hermione needs to take a step back and get to know the elves better before she can effectively help them break the chains of their bondage (they are enslaved, after all). However, what is partly so disturbing to me is the fact that wizards and witches take elves on. Elves may not understand that there are better professions and lifestyles out there, but people sure do. I don't believe for one moment that the Malfoys didn't know that they were downright cruel to Dobby, especially when he mentioned to Harry that his owners sometimes "reminded" him to take extra punishments. As far as elves not knowing/thinking that their situations are so bad, or that they aren't magically supposed to serve wizards, I have to say that they remind me of my students. My students have always had the worst of everything but when you always have the worst of everything, how do you know what the good stuff is? They are utterly convinced that smoking weed cures asthma (many of them are asthmatic) and that punching someone in the face is the way to stop gossip. This is what they believe they know; how can I convince them otherwise? Dobby is enjoying his freedom, but it hasn't been easy for him. I am sure that the other elves quickly focused on the fact that it was difficult for him to find paying work before they really thought about his freedom to choose his work. We also need to remember that freedom *can* be a scary thing. Many people (and elves, too) would rather stay in an unpleasant situation because it is familiar than go out and try something new, just as many people (I am meeting more and more) would rather depend on others for money, food and so on instead of going out and getting those things for themselves. Elves have known dependence for so long, the thought of independence is utterly terrifying to them, and I do understand that, as I was, for some time, completely dependent on my father until his business went under and I had to learn to fend for myself. It was the hardest thing I've ever faced, but I wouldn't trade the experience for anything because it gave me the independence I have now. I strayed quite a bit from Rowena's comment, but I just couldn't stop typing! --jenny from ravenclaw ********** From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Mon Dec 3 22:06:52 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari at yahoo.ca) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:06:52 -0000 Subject: Spouses In-Reply-To: <9ugscu+s1ak@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugt1s+6nhi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30679 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Heather Moore" wrote: > Obviously the biggest speculation surrounds Severus Snape; this > might possibly have something to do with JKR's whimsical response to > the question of whether he had/would ever fall in love. (For those > who don't know, she replied, "I'm shocked that you'd ask that," and > implied that the answer would be forthcoming within the series.) Ooooooh, that makes me feel that we're right on track. Usually, she either answers the question, or denies it. When the questioner has got hold of something important, she talks like that. Do you know where I could get of hold of this? > Hrm... I'm liking the idea that his leaving the Death Eaters was > over some woman he loved, although I vehemently reject the notion > that that woman was Lily. Maybe he was married in his 20s? Though I hold for Lily, it might be well to look at other possiblities. 1. He was in love with Narcissa Malfoy, and left b/c Lucius married her. :) 2. Petunia Evans? :) Sorry, I can't stop laughing. I'm going to have to call this post off, and find some way to calm myself. Eileen From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Mon Dec 3 21:45:54 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari at yahoo.ca) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:45:54 -0000 Subject: Harry as Survivor In-Reply-To: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugrqi+u75s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30680 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., lisa.calandriello at f... wrote: > Interesting point & well-taken. Besides that, if memory serves, the > hero rarely dies an untimely at the end of any epic. Oh, I don't know. Don't most real epics end with the hero dying? In fact, before this last century or so, when we got all soft about such things, wasn't killing off the hero pretty much obligatory? >From the Beginning of time to now. Gilgamesh - Dead Achilles and Hector - Dead Sigurd - Dead Beowulf - Dead King Arthur - Dead Robin Hood - Dead Hamlet - Dead And even today, we have the good old traditional touch of "No story complete without the hero as a corpse," in movies such as "Gladiator." However, I don't think Harry is going to die for a purely dramatic reason. I think he'd be a wonderful choice to die, except that the book would end with the Dursleys finally getting their heart's desire. Eileen From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Mon Dec 3 22:36:40 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari at yahoo.ca) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:36:40 -0000 Subject: Public Knowledge of Snape as DE? In-Reply-To: <045501c17c40$16d20ba0$0b01a8c0@enet.com> Message-ID: <9ugupo+mq6r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30681 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Gabriel Edson" wrote: > I've always been under the opinion that it is known by some that Snape was a DE at one point. Parents can't trust a werewolf, I don't think many of them would be enthusiastic to see a DE - former or not - as a DADA teacher. > I think it's pretty obvious that Snape's DE status is not widely known. Sirius says that no-one ever accused him of being a DE, and it seems Sirius has been reading up on the trials. I can imagine the trials being kept secret, which would fit entirely with Crouch Sr.'s way of doing things, and would explain why Hermione hasn't told us everything already. Only the results of the full-fledged trials would be reported. Mr. and Mrs. Lestrange - Guilty Lucius Malfoy - Not Guilty etc. Snape, being only mentioned in evidence, wouldn't come into the spot light. Furthermore, this scenario could explain why no-one seems bothered Sirius didn't get a trial. They don't know the procedure in convicting him. They just know he was declared Guilty. About the trials, how did Snape bear himself in them? He obviously would have a lot of evidence to give against his former colleagues. But Lucius Malfoy's attitude towards Snape shows that he's not bitter at Snape's behaviour during trial. Did Snape truthfully testify in favour of Lucius? Was he taken in by a show of repentance from that corner? After all, at the end of GOF, Snape is shocked when Malfoy is listed among the DEs at Tom Riddle's grave. Meanwhile, what does Voldemort know? If the trials are kept secret, he has no definite information on who said what, and his only source is the DEs accusing each other, which they are likely to do with or without factual basis. So, he may not know that Snape was a traitor from that stage of the game? When he says he thinks there is one who he thinks will not return and has betrayed him, I'm all for it being Snape. But I don't think it was Snape's career as a DE that put him onto this. After all, Voldemort gets to live one school year in the same building as Snape. Granted, he was heavily under wraps much of the time, but he must have seen a lot of Severus, and realized he was not working for Voldemort. BUT, is this any worse than what Lucius or any of the others, some who working in the MoM would have occasion to punish Voldemort's followers, had done? No, I think Voldemort only decides that Severus has indeed betrayed him beyond the betrayals of all the others, is when he doesn't show up at the graveyard. So, then, what if Severus was to appear a few days later with a plausible excuse for why he couldn't come? i.e. he was under Dumbledore's eyes the whole time (which was true.) Voldemort would give him hell, probably treating him worse than any other of the DEs in the graveyard scene. But, if Voldemort is convinced that Snape has only betrayed him in the same sense that Malfoy and the others are done, isn't Snape a little too useful to do away with? As for Snape impersonating Crouch Jr., I don't think the Ministry would neglect to advertise that Crouch Jr. had been apprehended. After all, they were anxious to paint Cedric's murder as the work of one lone madman. And, in pinning the blame on Crouch, there is no-one alive to object to the story. Except poor Winky. Eileen From ftah3 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 3 21:29:47 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3 at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:29:47 -0000 Subject: DADA teacher In-Reply-To: <9ugq2b+hej0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ugqsb+uga0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30682 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: Cindy wrote: > I wonder if the DADA teacher in OoP will be . . . just the DADA > teacher, for a change. I wonder, though, what kind of stock personalities remain for a > convincing DADA teacher. We've had Quirrel-the-Non-Entity. Lockhart- > the-Incompetent. Lupin-the-Terrific. Moody-the-Terrific-Who-Was- > Actually-Evil. Maybe the DADA teacher could be really mean, but > Snape already fills that role. I'm running out of ideas. Maybe > Karkaroff-the-Unctuous-Reformed-Traitor? How about...Moody-the-Real-Moody-Who-Would-Probably-Be-Terrific-Too? He was still around at the end of GoF (all twitchy at the head table); he might be both ready for a position where he could feel somewhat protected *&* determined to stick by Harry and protect him (Harry); he certainly has the background/training; and Dumbledore was obviously pleased enough to hire him once, so why not permanently? Also, I recall that in an interview JKR said that Harry would get a chance to know the real Moody in the future ~ I suspect he would certainly get that chance if Moody stayed on to teach. In that case, I would wager we'd have our non-evil DADA prof, while the position would still retain the quirkiness it's had so far. And no introductions would be necessary ~ we already know how everyone feels about Moody, how Snape feels about Moody as the DADA prof, how Moody feels about everybody else (presuming Crouch remained that much in character, which I suspect he did), where he came from and what we can expect from him. So that would take care of any excess and potentially repetitious exposition on JKR's behalf, leaving room for the introduction of a new face in a new place. So to speak. Erm, just a thought. Dana From mlacats at aol.com Mon Dec 3 23:00:29 2001 From: mlacats at aol.com (mlacats at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:00:29 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longbottoms and "happy ever after" Message-ID: <134.5ad6aaa.293d5e0d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30683 In a message dated 11/16/2001 11:27:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, sabin_oo7 at yahoo.com writes: > I believe that the Longbottoms will regain their > sanity at least for a while but I think that their > fight to regain it will result in their deaths. I > think that the "Happy ever after" type of ending is > just the kind of thing that JKR would do, simply > because she origionally started writing these books > for 11 year old children. I think that they will > probably die after their brief recovery either because > there was too much stress on their bodies during their > recovery or because V doesn't want two extremely > powerful Aurors back on the Ministry's tender. It > would be a sort of bittersweet way for JKR to end book > 5. (just think Neville could get revenge in later > books) > > scott > > > I thought that JKR originally wrote the books for herself; at least that's what she is quoted as saying. Harriet [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Joanne0012 at aol.com Mon Dec 3 23:09:46 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 23:09:46 -0000 Subject: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition and other newbie musings In-Reply-To: <9ugr1b+m735@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uh0nq+pfft@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30684 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Darlene" wrote: > I'm wondering, > WHY are there two editions? Did the US publisher think we would not > be interested in reading the UK version? Is this a common thing to > do? No, it's not terribly common. A very condescending VP at Scholastic gave the following interview and excuses: http://www.hpgalleries.com/c117.htm One good thing about being obsessed with HP is that there's always someone who's more obsessed than yourself. Here's a chart that lists differences between the British and American versions: http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/differences-ss.html From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Dec 3 23:21:36 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:21:36 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] OotP Prediction/DADA vs. Evil Female (Was: L.O.O.N. Harry's blood status, etc.) In-Reply-To: <9ugko0+9djt@eGroups.com> References: <9ugko0+9djt@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <16812283596.20011203152136@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30685 Monday, December 03, 2001, 11:45:04 AM, Barb wrote: B> (but I really hope Hermione turns her in B> instead of letting her get away) If Hermione lets Rita go, I think it will be clear for the first time why she isn't in Ravenclaw... -- Dave (trying not to sound sarcastic) :) From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Dec 3 23:28:38 2001 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (foxmoth at qnet.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 23:28:38 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <9ugps4+59s3@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uh1r6+3n2i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30686 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., dsslouisville at y... wrote: I am not a huge Snape fan, and must say that I am slightly disturbed everytime that he blatantly abuses his power intimidate and harass Gryffindors. > You would never see the another HoH, such as McGonagall, threaten to poison someone's pet by testing their schoolwork on it. I think the question is why does Dumbledore allow the harassment unchecked on Gryffindor, esp. HRH and N? Is he trying to toughen them up for the upcoming battle? Has he given Snape instructions to this end? JKR has said that Dumbledore wants the students to encounter all sorts of people. I think Gryffindors, especially, tend to assume that they're entitled to universal love and admiration. It's possible that both Dumbledore and Snape consider this a very dangerous attitude. I think Snape's dislike of the kids is genuine, but it also serves a purpose. Most adult wizards have a soft spot for Harry, and for Neville too, seemingly. Those who don't pretend to. It would be very dangerous for these kids to grow up assuming that everyone in the wizarding world is their friend. Pippin From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Mon Dec 3 23:31:16 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari at yahoo.ca) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 23:31:16 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <9uh1r6+3n2i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uh204+oj3s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30687 > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., dsslouisville at y... wrote: > I am not a huge Snape fan, and must say that I am > slightly disturbed everytime that he blatantly abuses his power > intimidate and harass Gryffindors. > > > You would never see the another HoH, such as McGonagall, > threaten to poison someone's pet by testing their schoolwork on > it. I think Snape would have restored the toad to health afterwards. He never does actually go over the line, just scares the living daylights out of his students with the fear that he will. As someone has mentioned it's Crouch Jr., not he, who uses transfiguration as a punishment. Eileen From jenrose981 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 23:49:53 2001 From: jenrose981 at hotmail.com (Jennifer Kington) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 18:49:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Longbottoms and "happy ever after" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30688 I seriously doubt she will end these books on a "Happily Ever After" note. She's said in several interviews that she's going to write these books the way she wants to, regardless of the age of her audience. Also, she's implied numerous times that Harry, the character almost everyone loves, may not survive, and also that many of the main characters may not survive either. She said once that book 7 will really wrap everything up as far as the survivors go, and I do believe she used the word "survivors." The books do get progressively darker and it would be ridiculous to end on a "Disney" note with everyone singing, dancing and smiling. Jen >From: mlacats at aol.com >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] Longbottoms and "happy ever after" >Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:00:29 EST > >In a message dated 11/16/2001 11:27:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, >sabin_oo7 at yahoo.com writes: > > > > I believe that the Longbottoms will regain their > > sanity at least for a while but I think that their > > fight to regain it will result in their deaths. I > > think that the "Happy ever after" type of ending is > > just the kind of thing that JKR would do, simply > > because she origionally started writing these books > > for 11 year old children. I think that they will > > probably die after their brief recovery either because > > there was too much stress on their bodies during their > > recovery or because V doesn't want two extremely > > powerful Aurors back on the Ministry's tender. It > > would be a sort of bittersweet way for JKR to end book > > 5. (just think Neville could get revenge in later > > books) > > > > scott > > > > > > >I thought that JKR originally wrote the books for herself; at least that's >what she is quoted as saying. > >Harriet > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 00:09:30 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 00:09:30 -0000 Subject: DADA teacher In-Reply-To: <9ugqsb+uga0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uh47q+d2mv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30689 Dana wrote: > How about...Moody-the-Real-Moody-Who-Would-Probably-Be-Terrific- Too? Having real Moody take on the DADA position has one particularly delicious possibility. Wouldn't it be neat if, at the end of OoP, JKR had the real Moody be . . . evil after all! We would have been suckered twice by the same plot twist. Cindy From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Tue Dec 4 00:11:37 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 19:11:37 -0500 Subject: Next DADA teacher, Snape, Astrology References: <1007414920.3489.61790.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0C14B9.EED927F3@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30690 Cindy wrote: > So maybe it's time to retire the DADA-teacher surprise and > look elsewhere for the Big Plot Twist. Actually, I think the next DADA teacher may well be the real Mad Eye Moody. JKR has said we'll get to see what he's like, and that he's even cooler than Crouch pretending to be him. > Maybe Karkaroff-the-Unctuous-Reformed-Traitor? ... > how about Winky as the DADA teacher? LOL! Andrea wrote: >>I wonder why has Dumbledore never given Snape the position that Snape so obviously covets...the DADA position? << Anyone want to bet that Snape hasn't really asked for the job? I mean the kids keep talking about it, but we never hear *him* say so. Not that he wouldn't like to have it, perhaps, but he seems to be a darn good potions teacher, and there may be good strategy reasons for him not to be in the DADA spot... but be seen as wanting to be. An obvious piece of "bait" for the other side to try to tempt him with. Eleri wrote: > Doesn't Hogwarts have an Astrology class, or is that something that's strictly > limited to the centaurs? Astrology is covered in Divination. Remember those awful charts? And Ron's hysterical quote about Neptune appearing with two moons or whatever it was? Elizabeth From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Dec 4 00:56:52 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:56:52 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Next DADA teacher, Snape, Astrology In-Reply-To: <3C0C14B9.EED927F3@sun.com> References: <1007414920.3489.61790.m10@yahoogroups.com> <3C0C14B9.EED927F3@sun.com> Message-ID: <19618001137.20011203165652@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30691 Monday, December 03, 2001, 4:11:37 PM, Elizabeth Dalton wrote: ED> Actually, I think the next DADA teacher may well be the real Mad Eye Moody. JKR ED> has said we'll get to see what he's like, and that he's even cooler than Crouch ED> pretending to be him. I personally hope he will be. ED> Anyone want to bet that Snape hasn't really asked for the job? I don't think he actually wants the job -- I think he has a passion for potions. But he wants to see someone decent in the job. ED> Astrology is covered in Divination. Remember those awful charts? And Ron's ED> hysterical quote about Neptune appearing with two moons or whatever it was? They also have Astronomy with Prof. Sinistra, but that's more scientific. -- Dave From sparkledtongue at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 01:09:56 2001 From: sparkledtongue at yahoo.com (Jessica Powell) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:09:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville and Trevor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20011204010956.59373.qmail@web21003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30692 Hello all: This is my first posting (after having lurked for a few months in the mailings)and I cannot remember whether or not anyone has posted this or not. I cannot escape the idea that Neville's pet frog is more than jsut a pet. Could Trevor be a brother/cousin/family member that Neville keeps not only to protect but also for comfort? I dunno, I may be waaay out there and making a fool of myself, but here goes nothing..... Jess (a very intimidated newbie) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 01:22:17 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 01:22:17 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <3C0BF88C.E6D4946A@erols.com> Message-ID: <9uh8g9+p2b0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30693 Margaret Dean wrote: > I had an off-the-wall idea: what if a poltergeist is what > happens when a house-elf dies? > > > Not to nitpick, but wasn't Peeves described as a little MAN? Or am I reading you wrong regarding your assumption that poltergeists are exclusively house-elves? Ladjables From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 02:01:04 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 02:01:04 -0000 Subject: Longbottoms and "happy ever after" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uhap0+9gj9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30694 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Jennifer Kington" wrote: > > I seriously doubt she will end these books on a "Happily Ever After" note. > She's said in several interviews that she's going to write these books the > way she wants to, regardless of the age of her audience. Also, she's implied > numerous times that Harry, the character almost everyone loves, may not > survive, and also that many of the main characters may not survive either. > She said once that book 7 will really wrap everything up as far as the > survivors go, and I do believe she used the word "survivors." The books do > get progressively darker and it would be ridiculous to end on a "Disney" > note with everyone singing, dancing and smiling. Jen > Frankly, my number one Trelawynish prediction for the Damocles treatment is Ron Weasley. That boy is not much longer for this Earth, and it has nothing to do with him betraying anyone. From djtarb at aol.com Tue Dec 4 02:35:37 2001 From: djtarb at aol.com (djtarb at aol.com) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 21:35:37 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spouses Message-ID: <91.1469a90f.293d9079@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30695 In a message dated Mon, 3 Dec 2001 4:58:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Heather Moore" writes: > > > Obviously the biggest speculation surrounds Severus Snape; this > might possibly have something to do with JKR's whimsical response to > the question of whether he had/would ever fall in love. (For those > who don't know, she replied, "I'm shocked that you'd ask that," and > implied that the answer would be forthcoming within the series.) > > > Hrm... I'm liking the idea that his leaving the Death Eaters was > over some woman he loved, although I vehemently reject the notion > that that woman was Lily. Maybe he was married in his 20s? > Maybe he left the Death Eaters for Arabella Figg, who was promptly snatched away to guard Harry Potter for ten years. No wonder he hates the poor kid! Diane in Philly From devika at sas.upenn.edu Tue Dec 4 02:46:15 2001 From: devika at sas.upenn.edu (Devika S. Lal) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:46:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spouses In-Reply-To: <9ugt1s+6nhi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30696 Eileen wrote about Snape's possible love interest: <<>> What about the mysterious Florence? Maybe Snape was the one kissing her behind the greenhouses! He seems like he would have put a hex on Bertha Jorkins, too, if she had been teasing him. Devika [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mollypickle at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 02:47:24 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (mollypickle at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 02:47:24 -0000 Subject: Neville In-Reply-To: <9ugsgq+9j6f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhdfs+lp4j@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30697 Very very interesting point. Neville doesn't seem to be as "dumb" as the kids seem to want to make him out to be. J.K. did, after all, wait such a long time to reveal what had happened to his parents. My guess is that he's got a pivotal role to play somewhere down the line and that he'll come out of his clumsy shell sooner or later once he accepts his magical inheritance. He and Potter are similar in that aspect. -Molly Denton ****************************** Trading stickers your thing? Come to Sticker Swappin' Station http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation ******************************* --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "JC" wrote: > > Jefrigo21 wrote: > Two, a lot has been said about Neville's > > forgetfullness. Remember the side effects of using too many memory > charms > > on a person, or using a really powerful memory charm for that > matter? That > > person's memory gets damaged. > > My 2 Knutes on the issue is that Neville may very well be repressing > everything magical about himself - he saw what happened to his > parents and feels that if he becomes too good of a wizard that the > same may come back to haunt him. It's a crude defense mechanism, but > it works. > > --jc From heidit at netbox.com Tue Dec 4 02:50:13 2001 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:50:13 -0500 Subject: FILK: I'll Never Tell In-Reply-To: <91.1469a90f.293d9079@aol.com> Message-ID: <001701c17c6e$6920f960$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem> No: HPFGUIDX 30698 I'll Never Tell (to the tune of I'll Never Tell from BUFFY: Once More With Feeling) Original lyrics are at http://buffy.randomwhim.com/omwflyrics.html (and you might be able to find a link to the audio version from there) and were written by Joss Whedon Parodied by Heidi and Cassandra Claire, December 3, 2001 Dedicated to Ebony *************************************************************** RON (Speaking) Well, I can do an omelet, I've almost got that... HERMIONE This is the man that I've known since our first schoolday Isn't he fine? My claims to fame were in class and library Top marks mine! But I've got all my N.E.W.T.s And I admit, he's sort of cute The only trouble is - - I'll never tell. RON She is the one With smarts and such fun No time will she waste Excellent teeth and her hair in a band's - - Embrace! Tight embrace! I'll never let her go The love we've known can only grow There's just one thing that - - No. I'll never tell. HERMIONE AND RON Cause there's nothing to tell. RON She's bossy, she's swotty HERMIONE His face is really spotty RON She's hanging out with Malfoy, who I so despise HERMIONE I'm gone - he doesn't miss me RON She'd rather read than kiss me HERMIONE He doesn't listen when I say I don't care about size HERMIONE AND RON The vibe gets kind of scary RON Like, she thinks I'm ordinary HERMIONE Like, it's all just temporary RON Like, her toes are kind of hairy HERMIONE AND RON But it's all very well Cause, God knows, I'll never tell! HERMIONE When things get scary He just hides behind his Harry Now look he's getting wary 'Cause he knows that I know. RON To clever by half, Never makes me laugh She nev - - HERMIONE He acts like such an ass RON This is my verse, hello? She - - HERMIONE (Spoken) Hey, look at me! I'm making confetti! HERMIONE AND RON You know RON You're really helpful HERMIONE And Pig's delightful RON You're the cutest in our class With your eyes as clear as glass And your firm, yet supple - - Tight embrace! HERMIONE He's swell RON She's sweller HERMIONE He'll always be my feller RON That's why I'll never tell her that I petrified HERMIONE I've read this tale There's wedding, then betrayal And I know someday I'll want to run to Harry's side HERMIONE AND RON I've lied I've said it's easy I've tried HERMIONE I even tried a love spell RON Is she really looking right past me? HERMIONE Why is Harry all that I can see? RON Will our lives become too stressful if I'm never that successful? HERMIONE Will I always feel uneasy with those One Big Happy Weasleys? RON Is she crazy? I'm a cheater! HERMIONE Will I marry a Death Eater? HERMIONE AND RON We can really raise the beam in making marriage a hell! So, thank God, I'll never tell! I swear, that I'll never tell RON My lips are sealed HERMIONE No Veritass- RON Nothing to see Move it along HERMIONE AND RON I'll never Tell! _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From margdean at erols.com Tue Dec 4 03:24:08 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:24:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Poltergeists References: <9uh8g9+p2b0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0C41D8.88A76562@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30699 ladjables at yahoo.com wrote: > > Margaret Dean wrote: > > I had an off-the-wall idea: what if a poltergeist is what > > happens when a house-elf dies? > > Not to nitpick, but wasn't Peeves described as a little MAN? Or am > I reading you wrong regarding your assumption that poltergeists are > exclusively house-elves? I wouldn't take the word "man" too literally. We first see Peeves from (all together now) Harry's Point Of View, and he's hardly likely to describe him (even to himself) as a "small male humanoid." 'S got two arms, two legs, one head, bow tie, it's a little man. :) --Margaret Dean From mollypickle at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 03:03:01 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (mollypickle at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:03:01 -0000 Subject: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition and other newbie musings In-Reply-To: <9uh0nq+pfft@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhed5+kd56@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30700 Oh how very cute and sweet for them to condesend to translate "barking mad" for us. I really think there are some 11 year olds out there who might not have made the connection. :::::rolling eyes::::: I am very disappointed that J.K. Rowling went along with the publisher's inane suggestions as to "watering down" the books for American audiences. There's already enough of a perception out there that Americans are stupid enough culturally and isolated from the rest of the world; but the fact that we couldn't be bothered enough to look up a few references in a book really gets on my nerves. No wonder many American children go about with the perception that Europe is just like America in that it's "one big country" made up of a lot of different states. Children here are not exposed and taught about the cultural differences; when opportunities like Harry Potter come up to teach them how England is different from the USA, with different phrases, etc, stupid saps like this publishing rep dumb down the material so children never have a chance to learn! -Molly Denton ****************************** Trading stickers your thing? Come to Sticker Swappin' Station http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation ******************************* --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Joanne0012 at a... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Darlene" wrote: > > I'm wondering, > > WHY are there two editions? Did the US publisher think we would not > > be interested in reading the UK version? Is this a common thing to > > do? > > No, it's not terribly common. A very condescending VP at Scholastic gave the > following interview and excuses: > > http://www.hpgalleries.com/c117.htm > > One good thing about being obsessed with HP is that there's always someone > who's more obsessed than yourself. Here's a chart that lists differences > between the British and American versions: > > http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/differences-ss.html From mellienel2 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 03:08:49 2001 From: mellienel2 at yahoo.com (mellienel2 at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:08:49 -0000 Subject: FILK: I'll Never Tell In-Reply-To: <001701c17c6e$6920f960$7d85bbd1@HeidiTandySystem> Message-ID: <9uheo1+gso9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30701 > RON > She'd rather read than kiss me > *completely uncontrollable snigger* actually, apply that to the whole thing. From rachael_talcott at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 03:05:37 2001 From: rachael_talcott at yahoo.com (rachael_talcott at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:05:37 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (VERY LONG) In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9uhei1+ljn9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30702 It's also interesting that both yew and holly have green leaves and red berries. Red generally is associated with griffindor and green with slytherin (although, oddly, harry has green eyes and voldemort has red)(and doesn't that make you wonder about McGonagall always wearing green and writing in green ink). The red/green combo could symbolize some sort of connection, or maybe the presence of good and evil in both of them (although not in equal measures). Also, there's a grove of yew trees at the riddle house. From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 02:52:30 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 02:52:30 -0000 Subject: Spouses In-Reply-To: <9ugscu+s1ak@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhdpe+u9mb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30703 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Heather Moore" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., egility at y... wrote: > > In her BBC online chat (for transcript see > > http://www.t35.com/hol/c118.htm) JKR mentions that a few of the > > professors have or had spouses but that this information is "sort > of > > restricted" and that we would find out why. > > > > Chris:) > > > Obviously the biggest speculation surrounds Severus Snape; this > might possibly have something to do with JKR's whimsical response to > the question of whether he had/would ever fall in love. > > > Hrm... I'm liking the idea that his leaving the Death Eaters was > over some woman he loved, although I vehemently reject the notion > that that woman was Lily. Maybe he was married in his 20s? Perhaps he was carrying a torch for Mrs. Lestrange? Which brings up all sorts of scenarios for future books regarding her stint in Azkaban as one of V's staunchest supporters, as opposed to faithless Snape turning spy and being protected at Hogwarts. Perhaps she will deal with Snape?! Ladjables From idouright2 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 03:26:48 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:26:48 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: why Harry lives with the Dursleys Message-ID: <12e.8a6dcd5.293d9c78@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30704 In a message dated 12/3/2001 12:02:32 PM Pacific Standard Time, ftah3 at yahoo.com writes: > In GoF, LV states that he couldn't get at Harry while Harry lived > with the Dursleys because Dumbledore had done something so that Harry > would be protected so long as he resided with blood relatives. Don't > have the tome with me, so I can't quote a page number, but it's > toward the end, during one of Voldemort's monologues to the Death > Eaters, before he and Harry duel. > I just finished reading GoF so now I can read all the posts without being afraid of reading spoilers! And this goes with another topic I read a while ago about the Put Outer. Towards the end of the book, when Ms. Weasley asks if Harry can spend all summer with them. Dumbledore replies that Harry should spend some time with the Dursley's...and after 20 minute of searching I can't find the part. Maybe he put a spell around Privet Drive with the put-outer as some of you were hinting at earlier? If so this would explain alot like why You-Know-Who couldn't get him before the Quidditch World Cup as it would of been much easier, etc. Sorry if someone has already hatched this but I'm trying to catch up with the posts. -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 03:35:53 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:35:53 -0000 Subject: Snape as Head of Slytherin In-Reply-To: <9ug2au+fpqm@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhgap+pj1f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30705 Also, canon seems to indicate that the Heads of each House were actually IN that particular house when they were students at Hogwarts. Perhaps Snape was simply the only teacher who was also a Slytherin (I say this because none of the other current teachers at Hogwarts seem particularily Slytherinish.) If part of Snape's job is to watch for "Dark" signs in any of his Slytherins, he doesn't seem to be doing a very good job of it since his favorite student, Malfoy, is a prime candidate to be a future DE. I have yet to figure out why exactly Snape likes Malfoy-- or gives the impression that he likes him-- it may be out of respect to Lucius or just the fact that he loathes Harry. It's another aspect of his personality that keeps us wondering whether whose side he's on. In any case, I'd be interested to know exactly how long Snape has been a teacher at Hogwarts, who had the position before him, and why that teacher left. Could it be that the previous Slytherin Head was caught grooming kids to join Voldemort? Why exactly was Snape hired? Chronologically, Snape appears to have been cleared of the accusations of being a DE just after Harry's parents were killed and Sirius was sent to Azkaban. I'm guessing that he was not a teacher at this time, because in PoA, Sirius appears to be unaware that Snape is now a professor: "Snape?" said Black harshly... "What's Snape got to do with it?" "He's here, Sirius," said Lupin heavily. "He's teaching here at Hogwarts." (PoA 18) We don't know what exactly Snape did to prove to Dumbledore that he had truly left Voldemort's circle. Perhaps Dumbledore hired Snape to prove his trust in Snape after vouching for Snape's innocence-- and incidentally securing for himself an ally at Hogwarts who REALLY owes him a favor? From mollypickle at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 03:38:13 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (mollypickle at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 03:38:13 -0000 Subject: Who will Die (Was Re: Harry As Survivor) In-Reply-To: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhgf5+fuju@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30706 I agree with you in that Harry is "The Boy Who Lived." He's going to make it through all. All seven books. No matter what, he makes it through. He may be injured, he may be maimed, taken hostage, tortured, but he lives. HOWEVER.... I beg to differ with you about Ron and Hermione. I don't know which one (or both) will be taken, but I'm certain that one will meet with a highly tragic end inspiring some very heroic action on Potter's part leading up to the climax of the entire series. I'm leaning toward saying Hermoine, since she is the female, but then again, she's always proved herself so smart and resourceful in the past, she's not one to play the "damsel in distress." It could be both Ron and Hermoine, who, involved in a romantic relationship, die a similar death to the Potters, defending each other. I just have a feeling that not all three are going to make it through... and since Harry HAS to make it through... Ron and Hermione are the two left.... -Molly Denton ****************************** Trading stickers your thing? Come to Sticker Swappin' Station http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation ******************************* > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ladjables at y... wrote: > > Hello, > > I'm new, so I don't know if this has been discussed to death but I > > would just like to offer some thoughts on who will die [shudder]. > I > > have read some previous posts and while I agree that most of the > > characters, my beloved Lupin, Sirius and Hargid among others will > > die, I've always felt certain that Harry will definitely live. I > > want to say Harry, Ron and Hermione but I don't want to push it. > > > > And my reason for saying Harry will survive is simply this: that is > > who Harry is. Not just a great Seeker, or possibly an all- powerful > > wizard, but someone who always endures; he is essentially the Boy > Who > > Lived. He has escaped Voldemort on numerous occasions, but he has > > also toughed it out at the Dursleys and deals with betrayal and > > ostracism very well. My boy will survive. At what cost I know > not. > > Any thoughts? Could someone convince me that L, S and H will not > die? > > Ladja From devika at sas.upenn.edu Tue Dec 4 03:51:29 2001 From: devika at sas.upenn.edu (Devika S. Lal) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:51:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville and Trevor In-Reply-To: <20011204010956.59373.qmail@web21003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30707 Jess wrote: <<>> Welcome to the list! I hope you enjoy it as much as I do :) <<< I cannot escape the idea that Neville's pet frog is more than jsut a pet. Could Trevor be a brother/cousin/family member that Neville keeps not only to protect but also for comfort? >>> Sure, why not? We've already had two pets, Scabbers and Crookshanks, that have turned out to be more than what they appear to be. Neville's toad may very well be something other than an ordinary toad, although I'm hoping that he's not an animagus because I think that device has been used enough. I somehow don't think Neville would knowingly bring a family member with him to school. However, JKR says that Trevor is "still lurking" somewhere, so I wouldn't be surprised if he turned up later. Devika [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 04:17:21 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 04:17:21 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <3C0C41D8.88A76562@erols.com> Message-ID: <9uhioh+jlpf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30708 What exactly is the difference between a ghost and a poltergeist? Is Peeves considered a poltergeist just because he's always wreaking havoc? Were all the ghosts at Hogwarts wizards and witches while they were alive? (Or witch-in-training, in the case of Moaning Myrtle) Professor Binns is really the only one we know for sure was a wizard, but was Peeves one as well? And why hasn't Dumbledore gotten rid of him anyway-- he really is annoying for the students and teachers. For awhile I thought that Peeves was a potentially important character-- that JKR would reveal his character's purpose in a future book-- but since Peeves was not at all in the movie, and JKR apparently agreed with all the cuts the movie made, I'm no longer sure if this is the case. But I do think there is a reason Peeves is still around, and it is not just due to Dumbledore's kind- heartedness. Also, if the Hogwarts ghosts were wizards while they were alive, JKR has not yet said whether muggles can be ghosts too, though it is implied that you have to "magical" in order to see the ghosts. Marina From idouright2 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 04:40:44 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 23:40:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagus - Pettigrew - DADA - (WAS Dumbledore and Tra... Message-ID: <3b.1e5c45de.293dadcc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30709 In a message dated 12/3/2001 1:18:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, cindysphynx at home.com writes: > I wonder if the DADA teacher in OoP will be . . . just the DADA > teacher, for a change. Setting aside Lupin, we've had a procession > of increasingly evil DADA teachers. It will be very difficult for > any subsequent DADA teacher to surpass Crouch/Moody in evilness. A > moderately evil DADA teacher would be a disappointment at this > point. So maybe it's time to retire the DADA-teacher surprise and > look elsewhere for the Big Plot Twist. What I'm wondering is if Dumbledore is going to try to send Snape back into dealings with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, Snape would have to be gone for quite a while. Which raises the question will we have a different potions teacher? Then the DADA teacher could be left alone and the Potions teacher might be evil. All in all JKR has amazing plot twists and surprises in her books so anything could happen. Plus I think she might want to give us a break over seeing Snape torture the Griffindors but I have this gut feeling that poor Severus will die before the series is over. On Another subject could anyone fill me in on their ideas on Dumbledore's "look of triumph" in the end of GoF? I have a couple but I'd love to hear others! -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From idouright2 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 05:10:46 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:10:46 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Next DADA teacher, Snape, Astrology Message-ID: <6f.1ebcca9b.293db4d6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30710 In a message dated 12/3/2001 4:15:24 PM Pacific Standard Time, Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM writes: > Anyone want to bet that Snape hasn't really asked for the job? I mean the > kids > keep talking about it, but we never hear *him* say so. Not that he wouldn't > like > to have it, perhaps, but he seems to be a darn good potions teacher, and > there > may be good strategy reasons for him not to be in the DADA spot... but be > seen > as wanting to be. An obvious piece of "bait" for the other side to try to > tempt > him with. > Maybe the reason Snape Loathes the DADA teachers *is* because they're just that. Teaching kids DADA. I'm not saying snape is evil or anything but he's fascinated by them and there's always someone around to rain on his parade. He also had personal reasons to not like them. Quirell was evil, Lockhart was stupid, Lupin was a Marauder and Moody was old and jerky! So thank you all for making me expand my opinions because I was also of the beleife that Snape wanted the position! -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From idouright2 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 05:21:30 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:21:30 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who will Die (Was Re: Harry As Survivor) Message-ID: <135.5b40762.293db75a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30711 In a message dated 12/3/2001 7:40:16 PM Pacific Standard Time, mollypickle at hotmail.com writes: > I just have a feeling that not all three are going to make it > through... and since Harry HAS to make it through... Ron and Hermione > are the two left.... > I agree especially seeing that out of the Mauraders one died, one turned evil, and two lived. I have a feeling that Neville mighty die, Ron turn evil over jealousy, and Hermione and Harry will live.....like someone said earlier history does repeat itself -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 05:53:48 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 05:53:48 -0000 Subject: Animagus - Pettigrew - DADA - (WAS Dumbledore and Tra... In-Reply-To: <3b.1e5c45de.293dadcc@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uhodc+4373@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30712 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > On Another subject could anyone fill me in on their ideas on Dumbledore's "look of triumph" in the end of GoF? I have a couple but I'd love to hear others! > My take on the infamous "L.O.T." has to do with a feeling I have about Dumbledore having premonition-like abilities-- that he somehow knows that certain events will happen-- he certainly is right on top of the ball and prepared for swift action when bad things happen. And there have been a number of instances in his encounters with Harry that he appears to have anticipated Harry's involvement or interest in. I don't at all think he knows exactly what will happen (obviously as seen in GoF) but as time passes I think he sort of picks up clues that indicate things are happening as they should. If Albus has prior knowledge of cerain events that could take place, (such as his prediction that Voldemort would return and his swift plans to do what he could to circumvent Vold and the DE's) he would be able to anticipate and hold an advantage. I think that the meaning of the "L.O.T." line is that the blood taken from Harry is an event that Dumbledore anticipated and that things somehow are going according to his "cosmic plan" to defeat Voldemort. From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 06:17:24 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:17:24 -0000 Subject: Damoclesian sword for whom? (Was: Longbottoms and "happy ever after"...) In-Reply-To: <9uhap0+9gj9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhppk+kb7p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30713 Heather wrote: > Frankly, my number one Trelawynish prediction for the Damocles > treatment is Ron Weasley. That boy is not much longer for this Earth, > and it has nothing to do with him betraying anyone. Personally my vote's on Hagrid. He has no family per se. His one love intrest is less than trustworthy and he's just got martyr written all over him (and that's a lot of writing!). He would do ANYTHING for Dumbledore, and I don't doubt that. So my vote's on Hagrid. Even though I KNOW these are not children's books, they are read by an awful lot of children, and killing off Ron just doesn't sit well with me. However, I wouldn't doubt if Harry has to shuffle off the mortal coil in the last book. He seems too "chosen", too "special" to get old. It is just too familiar an archetype. I'm kind of hoping against it, but the signs seem to be there. Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 06:23:15 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:23:15 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <9uhioh+jlpf@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhq4k+q3sv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30714 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., lipglossusa at y... wrote: > What exactly is the difference between a ghost and a poltergeist? Is > Peeves considered a poltergeist just because he's always wreaking > havoc? Were all the ghosts at Hogwarts wizards and witches while > they were alive? (Or witch-in-training, in the case of Moaning Myrtle) > Professor Binns is really the only one we know for sure was a wizard, > but was Peeves one as well? And why hasn't Dumbledore gotten rid of > him anyway-- he really is annoying for the students and teachers. > For awhile I thought that Peeves was a potentially important > character-- that JKR would reveal his character's purpose in a future > book-- but since Peeves was not at all in the movie, and JKR > apparently agreed with all the cuts the movie made, I'm no longer > sure if this is the case. But I do think there is a reason Peeves is > still around, and it is not just due to Dumbledore's kind- > heartedness. > > Also, if the Hogwarts ghosts were wizards while they were alive, JKR > has not yet said whether muggles can be ghosts too, though it is > implied that you have to "magical" in order to see the ghosts. > > Marina As I understand it, poltergeists are not usually assumed to be survivals of personalities -- they are not dead souls. I've usually heard poltergeists explained as psychic "entities" spawned by high emotions. Under that logic, it makes sense that a school full of magical adolescents would have a resident "naughty" entity. (Wonder if there are mandrake poltergeists in Sprout's greenhouse? ;>) From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 06:36:38 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:36:38 -0000 Subject: Wand woods (seasonal twist) In-Reply-To: <00ba01c17b5c$bc354560$9118073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9uhqtm+dp0v@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30715 Thank-you Hollydaze! And in honour of the holidays, and Harry's Holly wand here is an old traditional British carol with some interesting resonances... The holly and the ivy, When they are both full grown, Of all the trees that are in the wood, The holly bears the crown. O the rising of the sun, And the running of the deer, The playing of the merry organ, Sweet singing in the choir. The holly bears a blossom As white as lily flower; And Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ To be our sweet Savior. The holly bears a berry As red as any blood; Any Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ To do poor sinners good. The holly bears a prickle As sharp as any thorn; And Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ On Christmas day in the morn. The holly bears a bark As bitter as any gall; And Mary bore sweet Jesus Christ For to redeem us all. The holly and the ivy, When they are both full grown, Of all the trees that are in the wood, The holly bears the crown. --------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- I not actually a Christian and I hope this posting doesn't violate HPforGP standards, but it does resonate in terms of imagery does it not? I was particulary struck by the mention of both the deer and the lily in the song. Holly by the way, is assosiated with life/re- birth, but precisely because it is also associated with martyrdom, (green all through the winter, but with blood red berries) so don't hold that one up as a hope for Harry making it past the last book. Happy Holiday Season Everyone! ps. The first place I "twigged" onto the significance of the wands was from this website. It's an interesting read... http://www.theninemuses.net/hp/wands.html Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 06:48:50 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:48:50 -0000 Subject: Animagus - Pettigrew - DADA - (WAS Dumbledore and Tra... In-Reply-To: <3b.1e5c45de.293dadcc@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uhrki+3at4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30716 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/3/2001 1:18:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, > cindysphynx at h... writes: > > > On Another subject could anyone fill me in on their ideas on Dumbledore's > "look of triumph" in the end of GoF? I have a couple but I'd love to hear > others! > > -step > This is a repeat posting, but on Nov.25 I wrote on this same topic: I seem to remember some speculation on this topic back in maybe July, when I first started pottering about here. One line that stood out as significantly connected was the one in PS when Hagrid says, "I don't think he had enough human in him left to be really dead" (sorry for the bungled misquote, but I don't have my book readily available, and to run and get it risks waking the kid to explain why Mommy is stealing his book again). So the speculation ran that before Voldie didn't have enough human in him to die, but NOW he just might...ie. enough of Harry. So Dumbledore sees this as an opportunity. I think Dumbledore is the only one with enough knowledge to really understand what Voldemort is, i.e. what he has transformed himself into. And therefore, he is the only one who knows how to kill him. I think it is obvious, however, that Harry will have to do the killing. The other question that this raises, of course, is that if Harry is so intertwined with Voldemort, can he kill him without sacrificing himself? The more I read the books, the less I think it is possible for Harry to walk away. Perhaps the "scar" mentioned in the last book will be an identical scar to Harry's across Voldemort's forehead? Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From srae at mindspring.com Tue Dec 4 05:56:48 2001 From: srae at mindspring.com (Shannon Compton) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 00:56:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who will Die (Was Re: Harry As Survivor) In-Reply-To: <9uhgf5+fuju@eGroups.com> References: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.20011204005648.00a8c618@pop.mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30717 At 03:38 AM 12/4/2001 -0000, Molly wrote: > HOWEVER.... I beg to differ with you about Ron and Hermione. I >don't know which one (or both) will be taken, but I'm certain that >one will meet with a highly tragic end inspiring some very heroic >action on Potter's part leading up to the climax of the entire >series. I'm leaning toward saying Hermoine, since she is the female, >but then again, she's always proved herself so smart and resourceful >in the past, she's not one to play the "damsel in distress." It >could be both Ron and Hermoine, who, involved in a romantic >relationship, die a similar death to the Potters, defending each >other. I just have this gut feeling that Our Heroes, all three of them, will live through all the books. People speculate a lot on Ron, but I read an interview with Rowling (it was linked from The Leaky Cauldron website, can't remember which one it was though) where she commented on how people always beg her not to kill Ron and she says, "As if I'd kill Harry's best friend." That could be just a bit of misdirection, but I think it'd be entirely too cruel to say something like that and then go ahead and kill him off anyway. And I agree that Hermione can probably hold her own pretty well. I think they'll all make it. All bets are off on anyone else...though it pains me to even consider that Hagrid, Sirius or Lupin might die. Shannon From liquidfire at mindgate.net Tue Dec 4 04:30:16 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 12:30:16 +0800 Subject: Scabbers vs Goyle, Snape's fixation with DADA, the "Happily ever after" thingy Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011204123016.007a4490@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30718 Andrea wrote: >I find it strange that he would attack the son of one of Voldemorts death eaters. (He either bit Crabbe or Goyle, can't remember which, but both of their father's were represented at V.'s gathering in GoF.) Well, Ron was holding Peter (aka Scabbers) when that first confrontation occured. Perhaps he was just defending himself, you know. Wouldn't help him any if Ron got knocked around, he might also get hurt. Peter's self-preservation instincts kicked in, I guess. He bit Goyle, by the way. --- I'm a Snape convert, honestly. I now firmly believe he's part of Dumbledore's camp, due to the events after LV's revival. So now I leap to his defense. A lot has been said about his NOT getting the DADA post. I have some pet theories I'm going to run by you. 1) Snape is too good a Potions teacher, losing him to DADA might be considered a waste. Potions seems to be a very complicated subject, from what little I can infer from the books about it. 2) Snape's frame of mind might be too much for the DADA post. I'd hate to think what he'd threaten his students with if he's the DADA teacher. ("I have a werewolf in this closet, Neville. Let's see if you did your homework. Get in.") 3) Just because Dumbledore isn't giving Snape the DADA position doesn't mean he doesn't trust Snape. Don't any of you guys out there have friends and acquaintances you'd trust with certain things, but not with others? Jennifer wrote: >I seriously doubt she will end these books on a "Happily Ever After" note. She's said in several interviews that she's going to write these books the way she wants to, regardless of the age of her audience. Also, she's implied numerous times that Harry, the character almost everyone loves, may not survive, and also that many of the main characters may not survive either. She said once that book 7 will really wrap everything up as far as the survivors go, and I do believe she used the word "survivors." The books do get progressively darker and it would be ridiculous to end on a "Disney" note with everyone singing, dancing and smiling. I think all JK Rowlings has really done is to feed us all with a truckload of red herrings. See? None of us knows if Harry lives or dies. If you're a writer, especially for a series, wouldn't you like to keep your readers on their toes? I say we stop trying to guess whether Harry will live or die. In doing so, you're just trying to ram in your preferences, and Rowlings has stated that she will finish the novels the way she wants to, so let's not worry too much. If Harry dies, take it like a grown-up. If Harry lives, take it like a grown-up, too. Liquidfire (who is waiting for Book 5, 6 & 7 so we can get on with our lives) From knitwit1912 at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 4 03:59:31 2001 From: knitwit1912 at sympatico.ca (Karen Shepherd) Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 22:59:31 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition and other newbie musings References: <9uhed5+kd56@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0C4A23.7A5C30DE@sympatico.ca> No: HPFGUIDX 30719 mollypickle at hotmail.com wrote: > I am very disappointed that J.K. Rowling went along with the > publisher's inane suggestions as to "watering down" the books for > American audiences. There's already enough of a perception out there > that Americans are stupid enough culturally and isolated from the > rest of the world; but the fact that we couldn't be bothered enough > to look up a few references in a book really gets on my nerves. Newbie here, popping up with a thought... This idea of changing words in the books is also rather puzzling when you consider that we Canadians get the British text of the books, when we're probably more lexiconally (if that's even appoximating something that might be a word :->) like Americans. I mean, we get most American TV shows (and Canadian TV shows use the same terms Americans do), most areas of the country get almost solely American movies (or at least they're the ones with the biggest box office and most publicity), American bestsellers show up on our best-seller lists...so why not change the terms for the Canadian market? I personally watch a lot of the British shows that PBS and TVO carry, so I can't remember any terms in the books that I didn't know, or at least weren't obvious from the context, but I doubt that most other Canadians are the same way. I mean, I understood the British terms, but I've almost never heard another Canuck using them in everyday speech! Did any of the other Canadians on here find themselves scratching their heads at some of the terms? And as Molly said, I have to wonder if not using the same terms in the American "translations" has watered the books down a bit? I mean, the characters are British, living in Britain...to me, they should sound British! Just my 2 Knuts. --Karen "Potions Student" From ktchong73 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 06:39:16 2001 From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (ktchong73 at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:39:16 -0000 Subject: Who will Die (Was Re: Harry As Survivor) In-Reply-To: <135.5b40762.293db75a@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uhr2k+20kj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30720 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > > I have a feeling that Neville mighty die, Ron turn evil over > jealousy, and Hermione and Harry will live.....like someone said > earlier history does repeat itself I also have my own hypothesis about Neville's forgetfulness. Neville's grandmother brought him to visit his parents at the mental hospital. Every visit must have been a painful experience for Neville, so Neville's grandmother, being overprotecting and wanting to relieve her grandson from the pain, cast a memory charm on Neville after every hospital visit. That'd explain why Neville had memory problem, why he was so forgetful and dim-witted, and why Neville hadn't mentioned his parents to Hermione or any friend (because he didn't remember his parents or visiting them.) We can expect Harry, Ron and Hermione to find out about Neville's secret in the future. From ktchong73 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 06:26:58 2001 From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (ktchong73 at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:26:58 -0000 Subject: Ron Turning Evil In-Reply-To: <135.5b40762.293db75a@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uhqbi+oqkv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30721 Re: Who will Die (Was Re: Harry As Survivor) --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > I agree especially seeing that out of the Mauraders one died, one > turned evil, and two lived. > > I have a feeling that Neville mighty die, Ron turn evil over > jealousy, and Hermione and Harry will live.....like someone said > earlier history does repeat itself I have a gut feeling that Ron is going to turn bad. Ron is a very jealous person, and he is becoming more so as he grows up. I think Ron will be seduced by Lord Voldemort or Voldemort's agent and betray his friends in exchange for power. Ron will gain much power from turning evil. He will be more powerful than Harry and Hermione. That explains why Ron's new wand is unusually long, much longer than Harry's. However, Ron will ultimately redeem himself by sacrificing his life to save Harry, Hermione, Ginny or/and someone else (Ron's wand is made of willow, symbolizing sacrifice and cycle of life and death; and his wand core is unicorn hair, suggesting that he doesn't have too long to live.) From psammeaddd at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 06:23:28 2001 From: psammeaddd at yahoo.com (psammeaddd at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 06:23:28 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <9udvfk+u2gl@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uhq50+mnv0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30722 Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)wrote: > As I understand it, the "spiritual" energy that > creates the poltergeist symptoms is primarily sexual energy. With an untold number of hormone-charged adolescents AND a gang of apparently celibate/repressed adults around, it's no wonder Peeves is such a bother! From amyt at io.com Tue Dec 4 08:30:28 2001 From: amyt at io.com (Amy Tucker) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:30:28 -0600 Subject: Neville's forgetfullness [was re: Who will die] References: <9uhr2k+20kj@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <008a01c17c9d$edf439c0$0301a8c0@Domain> No: HPFGUIDX 30723 Ktchong73 wrote, > I also have my own hypothesis about Neville's forgetfulness. > Neville's grandmother brought him to visit his parents at the mental > hospital. Every visit must have been a painful experience for > Neville, so Neville's grandmother, being overprotecting and wanting > to relieve her grandson from the pain, cast a memory charm on Neville > after every hospital visit. That'd explain why Neville had memory > problem, why he was so forgetful and dim-witted, and why Neville > hadn't mentioned his parents to Hermione or any friend (because he > didn't remember his parents or visiting them.) Hi! I'm a newbie here, so if I do something wrong let me know. Anyway, if this is the case, it doesn't make much sense for Neville's grandmother to send him Howlers when he messes up and school and be on his case all the time about "disgracing the family." Does it? I mean, it would seem to me that if she were casting memory charms on him all the time, she'd realize that would eventually take a toll on his memory, and go a little easier on him. I think Neville doesn't mention his parents because he's embarrassed they're in a mental hospital. This would be a pretty hard thing for a kid of that age to deal with. I imagine that he just doesn't want the others to know for fear of embarrasment. That's my 2cents. -amy From klawzie at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 09:11:50 2001 From: klawzie at yahoo.com (Klawzie) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:11:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Next DADA teacher.... In-Reply-To: <3C0BE33F.904CD41B@sun.com> Message-ID: <20011204091150.27685.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30724 [cut various theories of DADA teachers] Well, how about this theory? Moody (the real one, of course) will come back as the new DADA teacher. But, as he's jumpy and the job is rather dangerous anyway, he has an assistant-teacher.... ...Fleur. In the end of the book (I missed it the first time I read it), she said she was going to try to get a job "there" (I assume she meant Hogwarts). As an assistant-teacher to Moody, she'd get more first hand experience with DADA, and teaching in general. Moody would have someone who would probably control his jumpiness, etc. Comments? ~Klawz klawz_hangar at hotmail.com http://klawzie.tripod.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From masi.simonen at kolumbus.fi Tue Dec 4 10:04:37 2001 From: masi.simonen at kolumbus.fi (Simonen) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:04:37 +0200 Subject: Hagrid as a teacher Message-ID: <000001c17cab$867438a0$8be5f83e@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 30725 Hello everybody, I?m another newbie who has been lurking here the last weeks. I don?t know whether this has been discussed here before, so sorry if it has. Anyway I found nothing from the Lexicon or the FAQs. I know that we all love Hagrid and want him only the best, but do you think it?s right from Dumbledore to let him teach Care of Magical Creatures? I don?t think he?s dangerous, don?t misunderstand me. But it seems that the students don?t really learn anything at all...(except that better kill a Blast-Ended Skrewt before it gets too big, otherwise, run :)) I think they?ve covered hippogriffs, salamanders, nifflers and the BES?s by now. Oh, I forgot the flubberworms... Clearly, there are other persons to take the place. Like the witch in GoF who caught them the unicorn. I know Hagrid is capable of being a really good teacher, but someone should tell him what the lessons are all about. He should go someplace to get more experience and study what?s the difference between magical creatures and beasts. IMHO, it?s not very wise from Dumbledore, because Harry has already wasted two years of his magical education for this. Poor lad, divination and care of magical creatures as new subjects... I know there are other teachers who deal with their jobs a lot worse. But I?ve had the impression that there?s noone else to take their place. McGonagall says that true Seers are very rare and people think that the DADA place might be cursed. By the way, I really love this place. Hope someone?s interested on this topic. Sini From laoisecronin at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 10:42:52 2001 From: laoisecronin at yahoo.com (laoisecronin at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 10:42:52 -0000 Subject: Damoclesian sword for whom? (Was: Longbottoms and "happy ever after"...) In-Reply-To: <9uhppk+kb7p@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ui9bc+nl92@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30726 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., > I wouldn't doubt if Harry has to shuffle off the > mortal coil in the last book. He seems too "chosen", too "special" > to get old. It is just too familiar an archetype. I'm kind of hoping > against it, but the signs seem to be there. > > Cheers! > > - Cornflower O'Shea In celtic heroic stories ,the hero always dies young so that he will be remembered at the height of his powers.His death is usually in an heroic act but he doesn't die because of lack of skill on his part,there is some trickery and cheating done by his enemy.So this could be a possibility. But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died do you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR to change who is going to die but we can all hope! From mollypickle at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 11:56:09 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (mollypickle at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 11:56:09 -0000 Subject: Poltergeists In-Reply-To: <9uhioh+jlpf@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uidkq+94fe@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30727 Marina, I recall hearing that scenes with Peeves were shot (computer rendered anyway) and that they were incredibly tough to get realistic looking. They spent a LOT of time and money on them and just couldn't get them right in the end, so they had to cut them. I don't think it was a matter of J.K.'s approval, I just think it was a matter of necessity. So I don't think Peeves's exclusion should be taken as a sign of his unimportance to the books. -Molly Denton ****************************** All sorts of stickers to swap At the Sticker Swappin' Station http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation ******************************* --- In HPforGrownups at y..., lipglossusa at y... wrote: > What exactly is the difference between a ghost and a poltergeist? Is > Peeves considered a poltergeist just because he's always wreaking > havoc? Were all the ghosts at Hogwarts wizards and witches while > they were alive? (Or witch-in-training, in the case of Moaning Myrtle) > Professor Binns is really the only one we know for sure was a wizard, > but was Peeves one as well? And why hasn't Dumbledore gotten rid of > him anyway-- he really is annoying for the students and teachers. > For awhile I thought that Peeves was a potentially important > character-- that JKR would reveal his character's purpose in a future > book-- but since Peeves was not at all in the movie, and JKR > apparently agreed with all the cuts the movie made, I'm no longer > sure if this is the case. But I do think there is a reason Peeves is > still around, and it is not just due to Dumbledore's kind- > heartedness. > > Also, if the Hogwarts ghosts were wizards while they were alive, JKR > has not yet said whether muggles can be ghosts too, though it is > implied that you have to "magical" in order to see the ghosts. > > Marina From LivBeatles at aol.com Tue Dec 4 11:11:32 2001 From: LivBeatles at aol.com (LivBeatles at aol.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 11:11:32 -0000 Subject: Neville In-Reply-To: <9uhdfs+lp4j@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uib14+fpk0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30728 <> I'm pretty new around here, and I was just thinking about posting something about Neville. I started thinking about this while thinking "Why was he put in Gryffindor?" And I too, came to the conclusion that he will come to play a pivotal role later, with the fate of his parents finally revealed. Cynthia PS-Sorry if this makes practically no sense, it's early morning and I've been up working on a paper --- In HPforGrownups at y..., mollypickle at h... wrote: > > Very very interesting point. Neville doesn't seem to be as "dumb" as > the kids seem to want to make him out to be. J.K. did, after all, > wait such a long time to reveal what had happened to his parents. My > guess is that he's got a pivotal role to play somewhere down the line > and that he'll come out of his clumsy shell sooner or later once he > accepts his magical inheritance. He and Potter are similar in that > aspect. > > -Molly Denton > > > > ****************************** > Trading stickers your thing? > Come to Sticker Swappin' Station > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation > ******************************* > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "JC" wrote: > > > Jefrigo21 wrote: > > Two, a lot has been said about Neville's > > > forgetfullness. Remember the side effects of using too many > memory > > charms > > > on a person, or using a really powerful memory charm for that > > matter? That > > > person's memory gets damaged. > > > > My 2 Knutes on the issue is that Neville may very well be > repressing > > everything magical about himself - he saw what happened to his > > parents and feels that if he becomes too good of a wizard that the > > same may come back to haunt him. It's a crude defense mechanism, > but > > it works. > > > > --jc From naycsh at rocketmail.com Tue Dec 4 11:40:51 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (siew) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 11:40:51 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir Message-ID: <9uico3+ispv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30729 Hi everyone Note: I apologise if you get repeats of this post. I just realised that I might be sending from the wrong email account so here I am again. Thanks. I was just wondering since Voldemort has now Harry's blood running though him, and if Harry is indeed the heir of Gryffindor, does that mean that a part of Voldemort is too? And it would be somehow impossible for Voldemort to elimate the whole Gryffindor heritage if he is part of it (though I would be rather disgusted if he becomes Gryffindor-ied) Rather far-fetched, I know, but that would somehow explains Dumbledore's look of triumph? And I read that the Dursleys might be protected under the Fidelius Charm, and thought that it made quite a bit of sense. I think it is either the Fidelius Charm orsomething along the same line that has Harry having to go back to the Dursleys every summer. siew. ps: If what I have written had been discussed earlier, please excuse me. I will go back to lurking :) From s_ings at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 12:40:30 2001 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:40:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition and other newbie musings In-Reply-To: <3C0C4A23.7A5C30DE@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <20011204124030.86670.qmail@web14603.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30730 --- Karen Shepherd wrote: > This idea of changing words in the books is also > rather puzzling when > you consider that we Canadians get the British text > of the books, when > we're probably more lexiconally (if that's even > appoximating something > that might be a word :->) like Americans. I mean, > we get most American > TV shows (and Canadian TV shows use the same terms > Americans do), most > areas of the country get almost solely American > movies (or at least > they're the ones with the biggest box office and > most publicity), > American bestsellers show up on our best-seller > lists...so why not > change the terms for the Canadian market? > > I personally watch a lot of the British shows that > PBS and TVO carry, so > I can't remember any terms in the books that I > didn't know, or at least > weren't obvious from the context, but I doubt that > most other Canadians > are the same way. I mean, I understood the British > terms, but I've > almost never heard another Canuck using them in > everyday speech! Did > any of the other Canadians on here find themselves > scratching their > heads at some of the terms? Nope, no head scratching at any of the terms from this Canadian. Nor did my daughter come running to me asking what things meant. My nephew, on the other hand, did ask what some things meant, as some expressions were completely foreign to him. I chalk this up to the fact that he's not much of a reader, which I think makes all the difference. I feel that most of us who've done a great deal of reading will have come across most of the terms used in the UK versions at some point and would therefore be familiar with them. I don't really think it's the fact that we're exposed to so much American media that's to blame, just the fact that some people aren't as voracious readers as others. Sheryll ===== "We need to be united and strong. We'll have losses and scares, sure. And you'll be there for each other, helping each other through the bad times." blpurdom - Harry Potter and the Psychic Serpent, Chapter 26 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Tue Dec 4 15:47:16 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:47:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying Message-ID: <200112041547.KAA05647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30731 ktchong73 at yahoo.com wrote: > (Ron's > wand is made of willow, symbolizing sacrifice and cycle of life and > death; and his wand core is unicorn hair, suggesting that he doesn't > have too long to live.) Um... his old (handed down, broken in CoS) wand had a unicorn core, as well. Maybe that was because *it* didn't have too much longer to live....? But we've only seen three classic wand cores in Olivander's collection: dragon heartstring, unicorn hair, or phoenix feather. I'm not sure we can read too much into the meanings when there are so few choices. The wood analysis seemed much more plausible. I don't buy the idea of Ron turning evil, in the sense of going to Voldemort's camp. He's jealous, but I can't see him being dumb enough to side with Voldemort. What could Voldemort give him that he doesn't have? He's seen what happened to Peter. I could, however, see him going apathetic, and not being there at a critical time when Harry needs his help. Not actively helping Voldemort, but not helping Harry, either. And that might be a bigger evil. Elizabeth From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu Tue Dec 4 16:40:08 2001 From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:40:08 -0500 Subject: All things Snape (verrry long) Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566C@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30732 Hi, folks. With all the new people and the renewed discussions of Snape's task, his marital status and/or love life, the rumour about whether he covets the DADA position, and various other material, all of which push my buttons, I thought I'd chime in with some summaries and ideas. Some of this may duplicate the Snape VFAQ, and none of it is "official," but I merely hope to give everyone some things to think about. 1. Snape as DE/Snape as spy This is probably one of the most asked questions about dear Sev, I think. To summarize, this question ties in to Snape's past and the all-important Task that Dumbledore sends him to do in "The Parting of the Ways." Is it to resume his role as a double agent? But how can that be? In the Pensieve flashback, Dumbledore reveals, ostensibly to a room full of people, that Snape was indeed a Death Eater, but turned spy for the good guys about a year before Voldy fell. Given that assurance, assuming Dumbledore is being wholly truthful, how can it be that the other DE's don't know he's a phony? Further evidence seemingly against Snape comes from Voldemort himself. That passage in the graveyard. Is Snape the one who left forever? Is he the coward? And what about his interrogation of Quirrell in PS? Voldemort was in Quirrell's head at the time--how could Voldemort believe Snape, should Snape come back at the end of GoF? Here's my opinion on the matter--it's evolved a bit since I last made noise on this topic. I believe that when Snape originally joined the Death Eaters, he was sincere. He believed in their cause and went and did horrible things along with the worst of them. But somewhere along the line, he realised that something was wrong. He may have discovered that the goals they preached had nothing to do with their true activity, or perhaps he figured out that once V got what he wanted, the other DE's would be useless to him and therefore at risk. Or maybe there's some unrequited or rejected love issues (hmph). But whatever the reason, he came to the conclusion that he could no longer continue to support Voldemort. Now, if Snape were really thinking ahead, he *could* have paved his defection thus. He *might* have gone to Voldemort before speaking to anyone else. "My lord, I have a brilliant new way to serve you." He could have pitched the idea that he "pretend" to defect to Dumbledore's side, all the while promising Voldemort that once in, he'd be able to access the old fool's secret plans. He could use his insider status with the DE's as the bargaining chip to keep from being sent to Azkaban and stay in the game. Voldy might have liked the idea. Approved the plan. "Yes, Severus, go and be a turncoat, but then come back and tell me what you learned." By that scenario Severus came to Dumbledore *with Voldemort's knowledge and permission.* He could have told Dumbledore the whole truth, that he was really defecting but feared for his life if V figured that out, and he and Dumbledore hatched a way for him to pass information both ways. He might not have known how much of what he told Voldemort was real and how much was made up, but it must have been enough to convince the DE's he was still working for them. In the meantime, he could go about his business with the DE's and occasionally pick up some tidbit of information that he could safely pass to Dumbledore. Thus, when Voldemort fell and Dumbledore cleared Severus's name in a semi-public way, none of the DE's worried about it. First of all, they were all lying, too, so they might think it was a ruse on Sev's part. Secondly, they might have figured, or might have known, that Snape was their "inside" man. Hence Malfoy's continued goodwill and other Slytherin parents as well. There are other variations on this theme that work equally well. He could have hatched the plan to decieve Dumbledore in earnest, but after beginning to work with the good guys realised it was the real way to go. Or he could have covered his trail simply as a more elaborate version of others' stories: for Malfoy, it was the Imperius Curse; for Snape, it was "spying for the good guys." Either way, the important thing is that he has some way of convincing Voldemort and the others that he isn't "really" on the good guys' side. As far as the PS business with Quirrell, Voldemort must have had reasons for not revealing himself to Severus at that time. Snape had no reason to believe that Quirrell wasn't acting out of his own greed, and if Voldemort never showed himself or instructed Quirrell to inform Snape, how could he have thought otherwise? I believe that Voldemort didn't want to reveal himself to any loyal servants until he was more substantial than a disembodied spirit taking up residence as an extra face on the back of some random dude's head. I mean, while it's repulsive, it's not particularly awe-inspiring or glamourous to return that way. Certainly not triumphant, either. Contrast it with the welcome he planned for his DE's in GoF. He wants to regain their support through fear and awe and impress upon them his ability to conquer death. He doesn't want to appear weak or helpless and he certainly doesn't want to beg for their help. I believe that had Quirrell succeeded and got the stone for Voldemort, he would have been quick enough to stake his claim on Snape's loyalty. Why is it so important that Snape be able to worm his way back into Voldemort's good graces? Because tactically, at the end of GoF, there is no other course of action I can conceive that does him or Dumbledore any more good than going back to be a spy again. If he does NOT, he openly declares that his loyalty has shifted and all kinds of bad things happen. First of all, he becomes a marked man. Secondly, the Slytherin students whose parents are involved will no longer trust him, so he certainly ceases to be a sounding board for them. Third, Dumbledore is once again left without a source of information from Voldemort's camp. Fourth, he can't use Severus any other way because the DE's will be looking for him, so he'd become a virtual prisoner at Hogwarts. It's been pointed out before, and it's worth noting again, that the scene in the hospital occurs one week before the leaving feast, and Snape is *present* at the feast. So whatever task he does perform, it's something he leaves to do immediately and accomplishes in time to be back for Harry to see him at the feast. It's also worth noting that at no time does Voldemort promise that the coward's punishment will be less painful or fatal than the betrayer's, and he does seem to indicate in both cases a sort of desertion. Furthermore, he notes some doubt in each case, as well, so it's endlessly debatable whether he meant Snape as the coward and Karkaroff as the deserter or the other way round. In both cases, the DE's in question can expect to be punished, probably unto the point of death. He specifically plans to kill the deserter, but saying the coward "will pay" does not mean he will not eventually be killed as well. Other theories about the task abound. Polyjuice potion, contacting some other group such as vampires or Dementors, even setting up safehouses are possibilities for his task. But does any one of those do anything to singularly and unequivocally both secure Snape's life for the time being AND give Dumbledore a tactical leg up in the battle? Leaving aside that I agree the Ministry will pin the murder of Cedric on Crouch Jr., thus making it impractical for Snape to impersonate him, what good would using Polyjuice do? He might be able to pretend to be someone else for a short while, but how would that keep the DE's from learning that "Severus Snape" is a bona fide traitor? More to the point, what discreet strategic and tactical advantage does that give Dumbledore? Not to mention we've discussed on this list how it seems clear that whatever he goes to do, he and Dumbledore have had this contingency plan in place for a long time. Impersonating Crouch because he's available seems like a snap decision, and this task does not feel like a quick decision of any sort. Say he goes to contact the Dementors or the vampires. Say even that they promise to protect his life. Can Dementors behave in that sort of way? We've seen no evidence that they can control the effect they have on people, or that they use their powers in any sort of protective manner. And vampires? We hardly know anything about them in JKR's world. But even if there is a way for one of these groups to help him in the short run, how does that help in the long? He still can't have them hanging about in class. He'll still be "outed" with the DE's. And while the alliance may be helpful, how much of an edge does that really give Dumbledore? And could that type of negotiation really have taken less than a week? I remain utterly convinced that reestablishing his "loyalty" to Voldemort is Snape's only reasonable alternative as a Task. Whew. Okay, that was just the one issue, but I think it's the biggest. Are you still with me? Dang, you get a rubber cigar. 2. Marital Status and/or Lovelife I hate this theory. I just thought I'd be up front about that. Nonetheless, I'll try to be objective. Many listies have speculated as to what exactly made Snape so bitter and hateful. As Amanda's husband puts it, "Snape has a Past with a capital P." (Thanks, Jan!) So what about that Past made him this way? Naturally, say many, it must have been some kind of love lost. Either he loved someone who didn't love him back (Lily, Mrs. Lestrange, Narcissa, Petunia, Florence, James, Sirius, Remus, Lucius, someone we haven't met, etc.), or he was happy in love and had it taken away (The Wife Who Died). Personally, I think his past troubles relate to some abuse in his upbringing, his move to the DE's an attempt to escape to something "better," and his rude awakening afterward to be a slow realisation that they weren't all they were cracked up to be, but let's explore this other theory for a moment. Okay, we hear from admittedly biased sources (the Marauders) that Snape has always been a bit... lax, let's call it, on the personal grooming side. There's JKR's reaction to a question about Snape's lovelife-- "Who would want Snape in love with her?" And yet she wanted Alan Rickman for the celluloid-that-must-not-be-named. This seems to set up a conflict--either he just doesn't care about his appearance, yet has a certain "je ne sait quoi" about him anyway, or he really wasn't that bad all the time. Let's speak in generalities for a minute. Lots of teens, male and female, go through periods where their hygiene is either less than desirable, or simply out of their control. Acne, hormonal changes, eating habits, exercise habits--all these factors contribute to greasy hair, oily skin, and even the state of one's teeth. Some listies have pointed out economic conclusions from Severus's dental health--perhaps his family couldn't afford braces--or perhaps he smoked, or perhaps he just hated to brush. For lots of teens like this, there comes a break point, when it becomes suddenly Important to look good. Usually, it's when there's someone they Like involved. Knowing this still doesn't offer any concrete conclusions about Sev. Perhaps he cleaned up his act to attract someone, and it didn't work, so he went back to not caring. Perhaps he lost the object of his affection and has been clinically depressed all these years. There's one part of this theory that makes a little sense--and that's as a contributing factor to his joining the DE's. Again, my gut reaction is that love had nothing to do with it, but it's possible that a rejection in love prompted him with an "I'll show them" attitude to join up. It's also conceivable that at first he refused, like many other wizards, and then Voldy went and blew up the wife and kids so Snape joined to save his own hide. I feel that's a little too dramatic and certainly not necessary, but admittedly there's potential. What I don't get is those people who say that such an occurrence is what prompted him to *leave* the DE's. Why would Voldemort order the deaths of Snape's loved ones, if he were already working for him? Why would a failed affair of the heart convince Snape he's wrong about the DE's and make him want to change? An elaborate proving to Lily or whomever that he's really a good guy at heart? I suppose a case could be built for that, but boy, it's a stretch, IMO. We're getting to the end, I promise. Only one more thing (and no, it's not whether Snape's a vampire. I can handle that in two words, if you like): Snape as DADA teacher. Again, I believe that this is a student-based rumour and has little basis in truth. We have the canonical evidence that no one but Lockhart applied for DADA in CoS. However, it's *just possible* that on that occasion, Snape *expected* to be offered the job and was waiting for it to happen. Immature and way dumb, not to express interest, but just egotistical enough to be possible. He might have been testing Dumbledore's trust in him, seeing whether he would be "thought of" for the job. It does NOT make sense that he'd make the same error twice, though, so while that might hold up for one year, it doesn't apply to 3 and 4. But really, I think he's far too happy with Potions to move. I think he gets a huge kick out of being the teacher who is extra scary and extra tough. A friend of mine is going through his teaching certification. He looks forward to being the history teacher all the kids hope they don't get. He wants to be the one from whom a C is equivalent to any other professor's A. I think that's Snape, sorta. As many others have pointed out, there have been extenuating circumstances colouring Snape's relationship with every one of the DADA teachers so far. I for one would welcome a DADA he actually respects, so that we could see more of the professional side of Snape. He has some sort of a friendly rivalry with McGonagall. She makes comments about the Quidditch season several times, and nearly always in connection to Snape. My theory is they have side bets going among the teachers (which also explains why she got Harry the very latest in brooms when she had the chance), but that's neither here nor there. And we know they work effectively as a team, along with Flitwick and others. The scene in the staffroom where they hoodwink Lockhart is one of my favourites involving the teachers. A final note, regarding Snape's status as Head of House. I do think he's young, especially among wizards with longer lifespans, but I also think it makes sense for him to be Head of House. Teaching doesn't seem to fit the Slytherin ambition mold, so perhaps there aren't many Slytherin teachers in residence. But beyond that, if he still is in a relatively good position in the eyes of former DE's, it makes sense to place him in authority over their kids, so he can be on hand if one of them begins to waver. One of my pet theories all along has been that Snape is there to protect the Slyth kids from their own families, to be on hand as a sounding board and confidante in case one of them should begin to fall. Granted, Draco's a prime example of a child at risk, but neither can Snape storm in guns blazing and assume the father-figure role for them. Hard as it is, he has to wait until they come to him. But it makes sense that he be the logical one for them to turn to. Being Head of House makes it that much easier. From the other side of the fence, I think Malfoy and the others would rather have one of their own leading their kids than a Slytherin who wasn't a DE, and Sirius says (wrongly, but with reason to be wrong) that he can't imagine Dumbledore hiring a Death Eater as a teacher. Which brings me to one final, final thing: the Dark Mark on their arms. I believe this has a dormant state where it is not visible. It was growing darker throughout the year because Voldemort was strengthening himself by drinking Nagini's milk. Snape says it burned brightly about the time that Voldemort summoned the DE's to him; then faded slowly after that. If he'd waited another hour or so, it probably would have been gone. That's the only explanation I can think of that accounts for its appearance without making it a distinguishable, discernable mark that Aurors could use to identify the enemy. There are probably many Snape-related discussions I'm forgetting, or ignoring, but this has gone on more than long enough. It's time for me to shut up. Gwendolyn Grace From faura2002 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 12:58:07 2001 From: faura2002 at yahoo.com (faura2002 at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 12:58:07 -0000 Subject: The Next DADA teacher.... In-Reply-To: <20011204091150.27685.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9uih8v+1ksc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30733 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Klawzie wrote: > [cut various theories of DADA teachers] > > Moody (the real one, of course) will come back as the > new DADA teacher. But, as he's jumpy and the job is > rather dangerous anyway, he has an > assistant-teacher.... > > ...Fleur. Don't think so as she is still inexperienced, and this is important in battling the Dark Arts (even if she's part veela). But still, there ARE reports that the next DADA teacher is a FEMALE. F. From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 14:43:54 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 14:43:54 -0000 Subject: Neville's Parents and Memory (WAS Who will Die) In-Reply-To: <9uhr2k+20kj@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uinfa+es1s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30734 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ktchong73 at y... wrote: > > I also have my own hypothesis about Neville's forgetfulness. > Neville's grandmother brought him to visit his parents at the mental > hospital. Every visit must have been a painful experience for > Neville, so Neville's grandmother, being overprotecting and wanting > to relieve her grandson from the pain, cast a memory charm on Neville > after every hospital visit. That'd explain why Neville had memory > problem, why he was so forgetful and dim-witted, and why Neville > hadn't mentioned his parents to Hermione or any friend (because he > didn't remember his parents or visiting them.) Hmmm. I don't know. Dumbledore tells us that Neville's parents do not recognize him. If Neville is having his memory repeatedly wiped clean, and if his relatives know that this will damage his memory, then why would they even bother taking him to see his parents at all? Neville isn't getting anything out of these visits, and his parents aren't getting anything out of them, either. Cindy From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 16:08:55 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:08:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Next DADA teacher.... In-Reply-To: <20011204091150.27685.qmail@web14005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20011204160855.22910.qmail@web20809.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30735 --- Klawzie wrote: > In the end of the book (I missed it the first time I > read it), she (Fleur) said she was going to try to get a job > "there" (I assume she meant Hogwarts). > > As an assistant-teacher to Moody, she'd get more > first > hand experience with DADA, and teaching in general. > Moody would have someone who would probably control > his jumpiness, etc. > > Comments? Or make him jumpier.... I agree the real Moody will be DADA, (didn't JKR say he'd be back?) but personally I think Dumbledore would be a more likely calming influence. Fleur frankly didn't impress me as being particularly empathic or supportive and I doubt Moody needs seducing. I'm not saying she's bad. I think she's basically sound under that layer of vanity an will probably mature into a fine woman, if she can master her tendency to use her inherited Veela qualities to manipulate men. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 17:51:53 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:51:53 -0000 Subject: Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying In-Reply-To: <200112041547.KAA05647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9uj2fp+gmvr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30736 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > > > I don't buy the idea of Ron turning evil, in the sense of going to > Voldemort's camp. > > I could, however, see him going apathetic, and not being there at a > critical time when Harry needs his help. Not actively helping Voldemort, > but not helping Harry, either. And that might be a bigger evil. > > Elizabeth I disagree... Ron may be prone to jealousy, but I don't think that necessarily mean he'll turn evil. He's only 14, after all. I think Ron has demonstrated himself to be a remarkably loyal friend to Harry and well up to the challenge of "fighting evil." His friendship with Harry puts him in the forefront line to challenge Voldemort, because as Harry himself says, things just always seem to happen to Harry, and Ron is invariably involved. Harry has never had any reason to distrust him. Ron knows a lot of highly sensitive information that he has held secret-- he is one of only 5 who believes in Sirius' innocence, for example. Ron has seen for himself firsthand the building up of events over the past 4 four years of his friendship with Harry, and he probably understands Voldemort's threat better than Harry or Hermione. After all, he's the only one who comes from a wizarding family and has been brought up fearing Voldemort's name. I don't think that Ron will die, or turn evil; but I agree with many of the other members that Ron is going to get a chance to shine soon-- after all, he is a Gryffindor and there's a reason he was put in that house! :) From amendels at lynx.neu.edu Tue Dec 4 17:57:55 2001 From: amendels at lynx.neu.edu (Aurora Mendelsohn) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:57:55 -0000 Subject: Canadian version In-Reply-To: <20011204124030.86670.qmail@web14603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9uj2r3+tcog@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30737 Karen wrote > > This idea of changing words in the books is also > > rather puzzling when > > you consider that we Canadians get the British text > > of the books, when > > we're probably more lexiconally (if that's even > > appoximating something > > that might be a word :->) like Americans. I mean, > SNIP > > I personally watch a lot of the British shows that > > PBS and TVO carry, so > > I can't remember any terms in the books that I > > didn't know, or at least > > weren't obvious from the context, but I doubt that > > most other Canadians > > are the same way. I mean, I understood the British > > terms, but I've > > almost never heard another Canuck using them in > > everyday speech! Did > > any of the other Canadians on here find themselves > > scratching their > > heads at some of the terms? I read both versions. No head scratching here. I am a Canadian who has been livinginthe US for the past 6 years and I am married to an American. When I arrived I thought much like Karen. But my years here my conversations with my husband have led me to think otherwise. For example, my husband got confused when I called hot cereal porridge ( something only eaten in fairy tales by bears according to him), when tea refers to some food that goes along with the beverage, when I use the word cupboard.....etc, etc. I think in Canada we are far more exposed to Britishism than we think. But on the whole, I didn't find the changes too jarring either way. A quick trip over to the lexicon and I'll list phrase my husband says (SOME) Americans would have trouble with , but most Canadians probably wouldn't roundabout, mummy (for mother), post for mail, holiday for vacation, fortnight, go to the loo The only benifit of the British version, is that it might help remind me more continually that the story is set in Britan, but that wasn't much of a problem either Aurora From raolin1 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 17:49:34 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:49:34 -0000 Subject: Damoclesian sword for whom? (Was: Longbottoms and "happy ever after"...) In-Reply-To: <9ui9bc+nl92@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj2be+nbc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30738 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., laoisecronin at y... wrote: > In celtic heroic stories ,the hero always dies young so that he will > be remembered at the height of his powers.His death is usually in an > heroic act but he doesn't die because of lack of skill on his > part,there is some trickery and cheating done by his enemy.So this > could be a possibility. That's not just celtic, that's heroic tradition over all. However, it's not true that they die young, just that they die before getting old. I doubt anyone will claim that Harry will be at the "height of his powers" right upon graduation from Hogwarts. > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died do > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR to > change who is going to die but we can all hope! GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's POV. Now that the seed has been sown... Joshua Dyal From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 17:36:19 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (Jamie) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:36:19 -0000 Subject: Scabber's first appearance In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uj1ij+hg17@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30739 Calypso - "The more likely reason is that Peter was a rat and therefore had a rat brain. He wouldn't have known Draco before Voldemort fell because Draco was a baby then and Peter hadn't shown his true colors. As a rat in PS/SS the name Malfoy would mean nothing to him as his rat brain wouldn't have been able to recall much about it." I don't know. If when Peter changed into a rat, he thought completely like a rat, how would he remember to change to his human form? We know from Sirius that one's mental state changes when you assume animal form, but it is hard for me to believe that it would completely change. It seems like you would have to retain some sort of human conciousness. - Jamie (who finds this hard to believe, but not the fact that a man could change into a rat...hmmm...) From raolin1 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 17:49:45 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin1 at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:49:45 -0000 Subject: Damoclesian sword for whom? (Was: Longbottoms and "happy ever after"...) In-Reply-To: <9ui9bc+nl92@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj2bp+q13v@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30740 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., laoisecronin at y... wrote: > In celtic heroic stories ,the hero always dies young so that he will > be remembered at the height of his powers.His death is usually in an > heroic act but he doesn't die because of lack of skill on his > part,there is some trickery and cheating done by his enemy.So this > could be a possibility. That's not just celtic, that's heroic tradition over all. However, it's not true that they die young, just that they die before getting old. I doubt anyone will claim that Harry will be at the "height of his powers" right upon graduation from Hogwarts. > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died do > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR to > change who is going to die but we can all hope! GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's POV. Now that the seed has been sown... Joshua Dyal From amendels at lynx.neu.edu Tue Dec 4 17:58:34 2001 From: amendels at lynx.neu.edu (Aurora Mendelsohn) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 17:58:34 -0000 Subject: Canadian version In-Reply-To: <20011204124030.86670.qmail@web14603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9uj2sa+vlqb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30741 Karen wrote > > This idea of changing words in the books is also > > rather puzzling when > > you consider that we Canadians get the British text > > of the books, when > > we're probably more lexiconally (if that's even > > appoximating something > > that might be a word :->) like Americans. I mean, > SNIP > > I personally watch a lot of the British shows that > > PBS and TVO carry, so > > I can't remember any terms in the books that I > > didn't know, or at least > > weren't obvious from the context, but I doubt that > > most other Canadians > > are the same way. I mean, I understood the British > > terms, but I've > > almost never heard another Canuck using them in > > everyday speech! Did > > any of the other Canadians on here find themselves > > scratching their > > heads at some of the terms? I read both versions. No head scratching here. I am a Canadian who has been livinginthe US for the past 6 years and I am married to an American. When I arrived I thought much like Karen. But my years here my conversations with my husband have led me to think otherwise. For example, my husband got confused when I called hot cereal porridge ( something only eaten in fairy tales by bears according to him), when tea refers to some food that goes along with the beverage, when I use the word cupboard.....etc, etc. I think in Canada we are far more exposed to Britishism than we think. But on the whole, I didn't find the changes too jarring either way. A quick trip over to the lexicon and I'll list phrase my husband says (SOME) Americans would have trouble with , but most Canadians probably wouldn't roundabout, mummy (for mother), post for mail, holiday for vacation, fortnight, go to the loo The only benifit of the British version, is that it might help remind me more continually that the story is set in Britan, but that wasn't much of a problem either Aurora From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 18:15:22 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:15:22 -0000 Subject: All things Snape (verrry long) In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566C@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <9uj3rr+na5i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30742 Wow! Sometimes all you can say is just Wow! That said, a few remarks on one of the Snape theories: > snip theory that Snape impersonates Crouch Jr. using polyjuice potion> > Leaving aside that I agree the Ministry will pin the murder of Cedric on > Crouch Jr., thus making it impractical for Snape to impersonate him, what > good would using Polyjuice do? He might be able to pretend to be someone > else for a short while, but how would that keep the DE's from learning that > "Severus Snape" is a bona fide traitor? More to the point, what discreet > strategic and tactical advantage does that give Dumbledore? Not to mention > we've discussed on this list how it seems clear that whatever he goes to do, > he and Dumbledore have had this contingency plan in place for a long time. > Impersonating Crouch because he's available seems like a snap decision, and > this task does not feel like a quick decision of any sort. > Well, you've raised a rather nasty issue about the "Snape drinks polyjuice and joins the DEs as Crouch Jr.", that is, both Fudge and the dementor know Crouch Jr. is soul-less. So if Snape impersonates Crouch Jr., he is likely to be discovered, particularly if Fudge motivated to claim the whole episode was Crouch Jr.'s fault, and he's been neutralized, so it's all over. That is a problem. Too bad, because I really liked that theory. OK. How about this? Snape goes to Voldemort and says, "Crouch Jr. told me the whole re-birth plan, and I helped him. Unfortunately, he was caught, and I let the dementor suck out his soul because I was afraid he'd talk. Executive decision on my part. How about if I take over where he left off?" Perhaps Voldemort would actually buy this. Cindy (who really wouldn't mind of Voldemort *did* catch Snape after all) From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 18:07:08 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:07:08 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir In-Reply-To: <9uico3+ispv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj3cc+ertf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30743 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "siew" wrote: > > And I read that the Dursleys might be protected under the Fidelius > Charm, and thought that it made quite a bit of sense. I think it is > either the Fidelius Charm orsomething along the same line that has > Harry having to go back to the Dursleys every summer. > > > But doesn't Voldemort know Harry is with his relatives? Or does the Fidelius Charm merely conceal location? Which leads to the next question, who is the secret-keeper? Does V know it's Dumbledore and that's why V says it's thanks to Dumbledore he can't get to Harry while he's at his relatives? Because he knows he will never get the information out of Dumbledore? I guess that was a few questions! Ladjables From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 18:59:01 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (Jamie) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:59:01 -0000 Subject: Lucius Malfoy (was "Public Knowlege of Snape as DE") In-Reply-To: <9ugupo+mq6r@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj6dl+heie@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30745 Eileen wrote - "But Lucius Malfoy's attitude towards Snape shows that he's not bitter at Snape's behaviour during trial. Did Snape truthfully testify in favour of Lucius? Was he taken in by a show of repentance from that corner? After all, at the end of GOF, Snape is shocked when Malfoy is listed among the DEs at Tom Riddle's grave." This is a good theory. Lucius Malfoy has fooled everyone important into thinking that he was not a true DE. If Snape left the DE, of course he would find comradery in another DE who did the same thing. However, on the other hand Lucius might think that Snape is putting up a good front as he has done. However, if Snape truly believes that Lucius has repented of his DE days, it would make sense for Snape to favor Draco - I mean, if you were to believe his family were truly not DE, then it would be seemingly unfair for him to always be treated with suspicion. (Not that I believe that the Malfoy's have truly turned from their old ways...) From Joanne0012 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 19:29:29 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (Joanne0012 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 19:29:29 -0000 Subject: WHY a UK (PS) vs. US (SS) edition In-Reply-To: <9uhed5+kd56@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj86p+tdue@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30746 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., mollypickle at h... wrote: > I am very disappointed that J.K. Rowling went along with the > publisher's inane suggestions as to "watering down" the books for > American audiences. There's already enough of a perception out there > that Americans are stupid enough culturally and isolated from the > rest of the world; Remember, JKR agreed to this bowdlerization under pressure from Scholastic, before the books were such a huge success. I assume that they pretty much forced her to do it, which is why I place all the blame on the *American* VP from Scholastic. It doesn't take much reading between the lines of the Levine interview to see that it was all his idea and she just went along with it feeling powerless to contradict him. I'll say it one more time: It just bugs me to no end that this foolish attitude was perpetrated by senior staff at a major US publisher of kids' books. From inviziblegirl at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 18:47:28 2001 From: inviziblegirl at hotmail.com (Amber ?) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 13:47:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30747 >From: "Cindy C." > >It would be interesting to know if we'll find out about more >animagi. I think, however, that we've pretty much reached the point >where there will be a groan heard 'round the world if JKR pulls >another animagus out of her hat. Actually, I would be surprised if Dumbledore wasn't an Animagus. I mean, he is one of the most powerful wizards alive. If he couldn't figure out the Animagus transformation, while four (albeit extremely intelligent) STUDENTS figured it out, I'd say that maybe he isn't so powerful after all. Unless, of course, it has all been an elaborate lie and Dumbledore isn't any more powerful than the next wizard...which is unlikely due to his many accomplishments. So, it's likely that Dumbledore is an Animagus but he is also likely to be registered! Yay! A small difference, but one that I entirely appreciate. And as many intelligent people have said way before me, two reasons why Hermione didn't mention it while looking in the Animagus Registry is 1)she only looked in the current century and he may well have registered before then or 2)Hermione didn't think it pertinent to tell Harry and Ron. Not that I wouldn't groan with everyone else when/if it's revealed. I'm sick of the "Ooo, I forgot to tell you, I'm an Animagus too!" trick as much as anyone. But I'm expecting it at this point so I might not groan too loudly. >We might need a new group here. Instead of a support group, maybe it >would be an advocacy group committed to the idea of having no one >else turn out to be an animagus, although it would be OK if one of >the students decided to try to learn this trick over the next three >books. Maybe S.T.O.W.I.C. [Stop Turning Our Wizards Into Creatures]? Heh. I'd be willing to throw a sickle or two in. Even though I even quail at the thought of the current Hogwarts students trying the transformation, it'd be very strange for one of them not to. I can imagine Harry writing Sirius asking for pointers on the spell and such. And Sirius, well I can just imagine him saying "Sure Harry! Go for it!". And Harry, the talented boy that he is, would probably be able to pull it off. *sighs wearily* Okay, let me steal myself for two more possible Animagi... ~Amber ******** http://www.the-tabula-rasa.com "It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people." -- Neil Gaiman & Terry Pratchett, Good Omens _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 18:55:07 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:55:07 -0000 Subject: Dead Narrative Sources in lit In-Reply-To: <9uj2be+nbc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uj66b+8e4s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30748 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., raolin1 at h... wrote: > > > > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died > do > > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR > to > > change who is going to die but we can all hope! > > > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... > > Joshua Dyal HP woudn't be the first story to use this sort of narrative twist anyway. The most prominent recent example would of course be AMERICAN BEAUTY (which actually breaks *several* narrative rules to lovely effect), but a couple of others would be LOLITA (Humbert has died by the time the narrative framework starts) and HAMLET. From mss4a at cstone.net Tue Dec 4 20:20:00 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a at cstone.net) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:20:00 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (Was: All things Snape (verrry long)) In-Reply-To: <9uj3rr+na5i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujb5g+m79m@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30749 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > OK. How about this? Snape goes to Voldemort ... Does anyone other than me think that Voldemort can read minds? (Remember "Do not lie to me. I can always tell"? Frank Bryce. Harry.) Personally I think this is a Dark Art. I don't think Snape can be a spy simply because Voldemort would be able to tell if he were lying. Melanie From gwynyth at drizzle.com Tue Dec 4 18:31:05 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:31:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Other character perspectives (was Re: Damoclesian sword for whom?) In-Reply-To: <9uj2bp+q13v@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30750 On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 raolin1 at hotmail.com wrote: > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... I sort of see that as a special case, because immediately after that first chapter, we see Harry waking up, having dreamed from those events, and apparently from that perspective. (Sorry, don't have the book handy at the moment, so this is recall, and I don't remember how explicit it is that the perspective is either Bryce's or a sort of floating perspective that doesn't include a clear look at Voldemort.) At the least, it sort of confuses the issue of perspective for me. I'd find it more jarring if that sort of thing happened without the dream perspective, honestly. It doesn't fit either with the past structure, or the school story genre stuff that is clearly part of what JKR is working with. -Jenett From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 18:49:21 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:49:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's gleam(long) Message-ID: <9uj5rh+38ic@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30751 This is going to be a convoluted, incoherent post. I'm surprised so many people think Dumbledore's gleam of triumph is a sign that he's evil. I know JKR says there are hints throughout the books of things to come, but I don't think she has ever tipped off Harry as to who the bad guy is. Let me explain. Harry is undoubtedly clever but he's still learning how to trust and who to trust. After the Dursleys you'd think anyone who was nasty to you was evil. But Snape isn't, and Sirius wasn't planning to murder him after all. On the other hand, people who seem harmless, interesting or even supportive are often the bad guys- Quirrel, Tom Riddle and Crouch-as-Moody come to mind. In each of these situations, the villain usually says, "yep harry, it was me, I'm the bad guy". They never slip up or leave clues for Harry. We don't ever see Crouch forgetting to take his polyjuice potion or Quirrel missing his turban, and the turban just seems comical. JKR wouldn't have such a wonderful climax if Harry ever figured out the truth in advance, so misdirection is key. My point (and I do have one) is that someone as brilliant as Dumbledore, if he were evil, would never let the mask slip. He is as unfathomable as they come. How could lesser wizards like Crouch and Quirrel hoodwink Harry but not Dumbledore? Dumbledore had reasons for letting Harry see that gleam of triumph that disappears so quickly. It's great that we can ponder its meaning but if Harry saw it too, I don't think Dumbledore is evil. It's not JKR's style to let the hero in on the secret. I know this theory has more holes than Swiss cheese, so please point them out to me. Ladjables From mss4a at cstone.net Tue Dec 4 20:30:29 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a at cstone.net) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:30:29 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper (Was: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir) In-Reply-To: <9uj3b2+l8ri@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujbp5+4d34@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30752 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ladjables at y... wrote: "But doesn't Voldemort know Harry is with his relatives? Or does the Fidelius Charm merely conceal location? Which leads to the next question, who is the secret-keeper? Does V know it's Dumbledore and that's why V says it's thanks to Dumbledore he can't get to Harry while he's at his relatives? Because he knows he will never get the information out of Dumbledore? I guess that was a few questions!" Personally I think Mrs. Figg is the secret-keeper. From idouright2 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 20:36:29 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:36:29 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30753 In a message dated 12/4/2001 4:28:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, naycsh at rocketmail.com writes: > And I read that the Dursleys might be protected under the Fidelius > Charm, and thought that it made quite a bit of sense. I think it is > either the Fidelius Charm orsomething along the same line that has > Harry having to go back to the Dursleys every summer. > Well doesn't EVERYONE know that Harry lives with his bigot Muggle aunt and uncle? Or did I misunderstand the fidelus charm? I thought the secret keeper had to keep it hushed where they were hiding and until he told the person who was looking for them couldn't see it. Maybe I was mistaken? -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 20:40:15 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:40:15 -0000 Subject: Plot Twist Clues (WAS Dumbledore's gleam(long)) In-Reply-To: <9uj5rh+38ic@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujcbf+v7hp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30754 Ladjables wrote: > In each of these situations, the villain usually says, "yep harry, it > was me, I'm the bad guy". They never slip up or leave clues for > Harry. We don't ever see Crouch forgetting to take his polyjuice > potion or Quirrel missing his turban, and the turban just seems > comical. JKR wouldn't have such a wonderful climax if Harry ever > figured out the truth in advance, so misdirection is key. > Originally, I thought there were few clues to JKR's big plot twists, particularly Crouch/Moody. But there actually are many subtle clues, often with just a bit of misdirection. The misdirection often seems to come in the form of characters disbelieving or discounting the clues. The most blatant clue in GoF, IMHO, is when Harry's name comes out of the Goblet of Fire. Crouch/Moody strolls in and explicitly tells us exactly how he put Harry's name into the goblet: "They hoodwinked a very powerful magical object!" said Moody. "It would have needed an exceptionally strong Confundus Charm to bamboozle that goblet into forgetting that only three schools compete in the tournament . . . I'm guessing they submitted Potter's name under a fourth school, to make sure he was the only one in his category." Then Karkaroff endorses the theory before he calls Moody paranoid: "You seem to have given this a great deal of thought, Moody . . . and a very ingenious theory it is." But we dismiss all of this and don't believe it was Crouch/Moody, possibly because JKR has established him as paranoid, and because it would be too obvious for him to have done it and then tell everyone how it was done. So she gets away with it. Another Crouch/Moody clue is when they are in the cave talking to Sirius. Ron says that Dumbledore is smart, but that doesn't mean a really clever dark wizard couldn't fool him. Another one (I think) is when Crouch/Moody turns Draco into a ferret. McGonagall asks him whether Dumbledore told him transfiguration wasn't to be a punishment, and Crouch/Moody doesn't know this. This is another clue that he isn't who we think he is. I'm sure there are others, but I can't think of any more at the moment. Cindy (determined not to be fooled in OoP) From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 20:43:44 2001 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:43:44 -0000 Subject: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir In-Reply-To: <9uj3cc+ertf@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujci0+8g00@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30755 ladjables:"But doesn't Voldemort know Harry is with his relatives? Or does the Fidelius Charm merely conceal location?" It's not the Fidelius Charm, apparently. Voldemort said he *couldn't* harm Harry while he was in his relations' care, not that he merely couldn't *find* Harry. He certainly could, and did, harm Harry's parents as soon as he found them. If it was the Fidelius Charm, Dumbledore could have put Harry someplace more congenial and protected *that* location with Fidelius. If it's not Fidelius, then there is no Secret-Keeper. Dumbledore did make the arrangements, and that's more than enough to get Voldemort's hatred. We'll probably find out more about the Dursley's protection as time goes on. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Tue Dec 4 18:11:30 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:11:30 -0000 Subject: Scabied Hands (a holiday filk) Message-ID: <9uj3ki+jgu2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30756 They're back! The Dementor Glee Club with a seasonal favorite! Scabied Hands (from PoA) Dedicated to Steve Vander Ark THE SCENE: The Village of Hogsmeade, festooned with bright Christmas decorations. Enter CHORUS OF DEMENTORS. CHORUS Tonight we stalk Hogsmeade sidewalks Dressed in ominous style In the air there's a feeling of horror Children screaming, people fainting You won't smile for awhile We'd make snowmen abominable Scabi?d hands Scabi?d hands It's Christmas time for dementors Make `em drop as they shop Sales will be sure to tank You won't get kissed If on our list You are listed as "nice" But that Sirius has been rather "naughty" Hear the crowds gasp Hear our breath rasp This is all thanks to Fudge We all dream of a Christmas that's Black Scabi?d hands Scabi?d hands This Christmas we are in Hogsmeade Gloom and pain, joy we drain, Stay away from mistletoe! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 21:10:00 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:10:00 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as a teacher In-Reply-To: <000001c17cab$867438a0$8be5f83e@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <9uje38+phbu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30757 > > I know that we all love Hagrid and want him only the best, but do you think it?s right from Dumbledore to let him teach Care of Magical Creatures? I apologize is this is a duplicate message...I posted before, but system froze and am unsure if it sent. Anyway... I think that this brings up an interesting point. Since Hagrid was expelled (albeit on bogus and trumped-up charges) and is therefore prohibited from using magic, should he be the autority figure in a class of students even though he does not technically have the authority to intervene magically if something goes wrong? I mean, Care of Magical Creatures has not exactly turned out to be an "in the classroom, learn by the text" sort of class. If that were the case, with no actual magical creatures, then whether or not Hagrid could perform magic would be a moot point. Futhermore, do you think that Dumbledore somehow took it upon himself to complete Hagrid's wizard training after his expulsion?? Hagrid does seem pretty adept with his "umbrella"... Andrea From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 21:10:44 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:10:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron & Dumbledore Message-ID: <14a.522b1f2.293e95d4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30758 i dont think that that'd be true, because Ron and Dumbledore have different personaltites. Ron has more of a temper, and seems to be lacking self-confidence, while Dumbledore rarely loses his temper, and seems very self content From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 21:11:48 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:11:48 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore and Transfiguration Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30759 i bet dumbledore is an amimagus, but he couldnt be fawkes, becuase both harry and sirius are in the room with Dumbledore and Fawkes at the same time (in GoF), and that wouldne be impossible to do if dumbledore was fawkes From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 21:18:09 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:18:09 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30760 i agree completely with you, Elizabeth. Ron is a great character, and yes he's jealou sometimes, but he's also proven himslef to be a great and loyal friend. hopeful in the upcoming books, he will be able to shine, or prove his powers From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu Tue Dec 4 21:19:51 2001 From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:19:51 -0500 Subject: Snape as spy (again) Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566E@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30761 I guess I'll field this one.... > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > > > OK. How about this? Snape goes to Voldemort ... And Melanie said: > Does anyone other than me think that Voldemort can read > minds? (Remember "Do not lie to me. I can always tell"? Frank > Bryce. Harry.) Personally I think this is a Dark Art. > > I don't think Snape can be a spy simply because Voldemort > would be able to tell if he were lying. Ah, Melissa, that's only if you assume that this supposed "power" of Voldemort's is a. mind-reading or b. some other infallible "art" or "talent." Personally, I haven't seen him do anything in any of the books that couldn't be explained by a keen sense of observation and being able to read people very intuitively. Even in PS, it's entirely possible that Voldermort-inside-Quirrell is able to "see" through Quirrell's eyes and was able to read something in Harry's expression or perceive the change in his trouser line when the stone appeared in his pocket, thereby knowing it was there. But are we simply to take his word that he's infallible? Not in my book. He's not a mind reader. Sorry, I don't buy it. The main thrust of my position remains the same, though: If Severus did not return to try to spy, one way or another, then what DID he do that both creates a strategic advantage *and* protects him from Voldermort's wrath? As far as Cindy's theory about using Crouch, again, KISS applies. He may well explain that Crouch was caught and he couldn't do anything about it--in fact, I'd be disappointed in him if he didn't explain himself in a similar fashion--but he still doesn't need to use PJ potion for anything. If he's wise, he'll offer to go back to doing exactly what he was doing before: mainly, hanging out in D's camp and passing pertinent info to Voldy, while sabotaging things if and when he can. In reality, of course, he'll be doing those things in the opposite direction. In other words, Cindy, yes, that's exactly what I think Snape MUST do. Don't get me wrong, folks: he's still in for a lot of torture, testing, and generally having a hard time of it due to distrust and all kinds of sticky situations involving divided loyalties. But I haven't yet seen an alternative that accomplishes any meaningful task that will benefit them in the coming war. That's not to say that alliances aren't important, either; but _Snape's_ connection with the DE's is too valuable to throw away. It's an incredibly risky manoeuver. But it's a necessary one. Out of curiosity, could it be that the reason some people don't like this alternative is because it means Dumbledore is playing God with Snape's life, sending him into a situation where there was a VERY good chance he wouldn't survive, and would die painfully to boot? Gwen (staunchly defending a nasty, abusive, unloving, clever, icy, and dangerous Snape) From Chelsea2162 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 21:21:43 2001 From: Chelsea2162 at aol.com (Chelsea2162 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:21:43 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's secret-keeper (Was: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor'... Message-ID: <14.1eb2c77b.293e9867@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30762 ladjables, i thikn you got it....i was sitting around trying to figure out who could possibly be the secret-keeper for harry, if he ad the dursleys were under the fidelius charm, and then i read your response and you said mrs.figg...ah ha! jk rowling said that mrs figg was going to be explained soon, and i really think she could be it. she was part of the "old crowd" (dumbledore mentions her name to sirius in GoF when he tells him to round up the old crowd)...i think that arabaella knew james and lily, and has been looking after harry for so long becuase she was friends with him and his family, and became the secret keeper. htink about it - why else would she look after harry? she doesnt seem to really want to - im guessing thats a facade for her really protectign him From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 21:22:08 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:22:08 -0000 Subject: Plot Twist Clues (WAS Dumbledore's gleam(long)) In-Reply-To: <9ujcbf+v7hp@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujeq0+egtn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30763 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > Ladjables wrote: > > > > > In each of these situations, the villain usually says, "yep harry, > it > > was me, I'm the bad guy". They never slip up or leave clues for > > Harry. We don't ever see Crouch forgetting to take his polyjuice > > potion or Quirrel missing his turban, and the turban just seems > > comical. JKR wouldn't have such a wonderful climax if Harry ever > > figured out the truth in advance, so misdirection is key. > > > > Originally, I thought there were few clues to JKR's big plot twists, > particularly Crouch/Moody. But there actually are many subtle clues, > often with just a bit of misdirection. The misdirection often seems > to come in the form of characters disbelieving or discounting the > clues. > > The most blatant clue in GoF, IMHO, is when Harry's name comes out of > the Goblet of Fire. Crouch/Moody strolls in and explicitly tells us > exactly how he put Harry's name into the goblet: > > "They hoodwinked a very powerful magical object!" said Moody. "It > would have needed an exceptionally strong Confundus Charm to > bamboozle that goblet into forgetting that only three schools compete > in the tournament . . . I'm guessing they submitted Potter's name > under a fourth school, to make sure he was the only one in his > category." > > Then Karkaroff endorses the theory before he calls Moody > paranoid: "You seem to have given this a great deal of thought, > Moody . . . and a very ingenious theory it is." > > But we dismiss all of this and don't believe it was Crouch/Moody, > possibly because JKR has established him as paranoid, and because it > would be too obvious for him to have done it and then tell everyone > how it was done. So she gets away with it. > > Another Crouch/Moody clue is when they are in the cave talking to > Sirius. Ron says that Dumbledore is smart, but that doesn't mean a > really clever dark wizard couldn't fool him. Another one (I think) > is when Crouch/Moody turns Draco into a ferret. McGonagall asks him > whether Dumbledore told him transfiguration wasn't to be a > punishment, and Crouch/Moody doesn't know this. This is another clue > that he isn't who we think he is. > > I'm sure there are others, but I can't think of any more at the > moment. > > Cindy (determined not to be fooled in OoP) Good God, me too. At this point, the best plot twist JKR could possibly spring on us would be "Harry Potter and the Hammers of Infinite Perception," in which someone mysteriously sends Harry, Sirius, and Snape a friggin' Clue. ;> From lucy at luphen.co.uk Tue Dec 4 21:45:50 2001 From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:45:50 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Animagus References: Message-ID: <006b01c17d0d$0a757040$53af1e3e@stephen> No: HPFGUIDX 30764 >Actually, I would be surprised if Dumbledore wasn't an Animagus. I mean, he is one of the most powerful wizards alive. If he couldn't figure out the Animagus transformation, while four (albeit extremely intelligent) STUDENTS figured it out, I'd say that maybe he isn't so powerful after all. Unless, of course, it has all been an elaborate lie and Dumbledore isn't any more powerful than the next wizard...which is unlikely due to his many accomplishments. >So, it's likely that Dumbledore is an Animagus but he is also likely to be registered! Yay! A small difference, but one that I entirely appreciate. And as many intelligent people have said way before me, two reasons why Hermione didn't mention it while looking in the Animagus Registry is 1)she only looked in the current century and he may well have registered before then or 2)Hermione didn't think it pertinent to tell Harry and Ron. >Not that I wouldn't groan with everyone else when/if it's revealed. I'm sick of the "Ooo, I forgot to tell you, I'm an Animagus too!" trick as much as anyone. But I'm expecting it at this point so I might not groan too loudly. Yes, I'd groan a bit too - it would have to be very carefully written. >>We might need a new group here. Instead of a support group, maybe it >>would be an advocacy group committed to the idea of having no one >>else turn out to be an animagus, although it would be OK if one of >>the students decided to try to learn this trick over the next three >>books. Maybe S.T.O.W.I.C. [Stop Turning Our Wizards Into Creatures]? >Heh. I'd be willing to throw a sickle or two in. Even though I even quail at the thought of the current Hogwarts students trying the transformation, it'd be very strange for one of them not to. I can imagine Harry writing Sirius asking for pointers on the spell and such. And Sirius, well I can just imagine him saying "Sure Harry! Go for it!". And Harry, the talented boy that he is, would probably be able to pull it off. *sighs wearily* Okay, let me steal myself for two more possible Animagi... >~Amber I'll join that group too. Seriously though, I seem to recall something mentioned about JKR saying Harry wouldn't become an animagus, which I think is rather a shame. Perhaps Ron will and prove that he is as clever a wizard as Hermione in some areas! Lucy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lucy at luphen.co.uk Tue Dec 4 21:47:42 2001 From: lucy at luphen.co.uk (Lucy Austin) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:47:42 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dead Narrative Sources in lit References: <9uj66b+8e4s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <007301c17d0d$4d89ae00$53af1e3e@stephen> No: HPFGUIDX 30765 > > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died > do > > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR > to > > change who is going to die but we can all hope! > > > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... > > Joshua Dyal >HP woudn't be the first story to use this sort of narrative twist anyway. The most prominent recent example would of course be AMERICAN BEAUTY (which actually breaks *several* narrative rules to lovely effect), but a couple of others would be LOLITA (Humbert has died by the time the narrative framework starts) and HAMLET. And as you can become a ghost, the last couple of paragraphs could still be from Harry's POV! I would hate him to die, but I have to admit I can quite easily see him sacrifcing himself to kill V and save the world etc. Lucy, who really hopes no-one like HRH, Hagrid, Sirius or Remus die, but wouldn't mind Dobby dying! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 21:50:16 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:50:16 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566E@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <9ujgeo+qoss@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30766 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Hillman, Lee" wrote: > Even in PS, it's entirely possible that > Voldermort-inside-Quirrell is able to "see" through Quirrell's eyes and was > able to read something in Harry's expression or perceive the change in his > trouser line when the stone appeared in his pocket, thereby knowing it was > there. But are we simply to take his word that he's infallible? Not in my > book. He's not a mind reader. Sorry, I don't buy it. > Gaah, ooh, ick. Somehow the mental image of Quirdemort (Voldirrell?) taking especial notice of Harry's... uhm.... crotch vicinity.... is just striking me in my shuddery spot. To quote Velma, "Jinkies!" > Out of curiosity, could it be that the reason some people don't like this > alternative is because it means Dumbledore is playing God with Snape's life, > sending him into a situation where there was a VERY good chance he wouldn't > survive, and would die painfully to boot? > > Gwen (staunchly defending a nasty, abusive, unloving, clever, icy, and > dangerous Snape) Even a Snape fan like myself (I agree with all of the except maybe "abusive") has to stand up and say that it isn't as though Snape didn't *earn* this dangerous sort of penance through his prior participation in the DEs. He seems willing to take his medicine manfully. From valjean131 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 20:20:24 2001 From: valjean131 at aol.com (Monique) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:20:24 -0000 Subject: DADA prof. In-Reply-To: <9uglor+10o8i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujb68+qstm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30767 > > > And I know that we're supposed to > > have a female DADA teacher in book five, but it seems highly > > doubtful that she'd be evil. > > > I made the same inferrence once and was politely corrected. JKR > stated there would be a female DADA teacher in the future, but she > did not say it would necessarily be in Book 5 - could be 6 or 7. >See http://www.t35.com/hol/c107.htm for a transcript. > > My pet theory though is that Mrs. Figg will turn up at some point >in Book 5 as the DADA instructor. Oh, and she will not be evil. This is my theory too. She must be skilled in the Defense Against the Dark Arts or she wouldn't have been protecting Harry all these years. Dumbledore has summoned her, and what better way to keep an eye on Harry than to be DADA instructor. Can't you imagine the first day off class. It's been rumored that the new DADA teacher is a woman. In all their hormonal glory, the boys have speculated on what exotic adventurer they might get. Low and behold it's the old lady that smells like cabbage. Works for me. ;-) -Monique From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 20:20:12 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:20:12 -0000 Subject: Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ujb5s+mpq8@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30768 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amber ?" wrote: > Heh. I'd be willing to throw a sickle or two in. Even though I quail at the thought of the current Hogwarts students trying the transformation, it'd be very strange for one of them not to. I can imagine Harry writing Sirius asking for pointers on the spell and such. *sighs wearily* Okay, let me steal myself for two more possible Animagi... > > ~Amber > > I seem to recall JKR saying that Harry will not be an animagus. Of course my memory cannot pull up the exact interview, but I've been wondering if Harry will turn into something ELSE. He must have some special ability besides parseltongue and defending himself against the Dark Arts. Surely there are different types of wizards, who can transfigure into an element, or transfigure their spirits, I don't mean anything nefarious like Voldemort's spirit possession, or can use their minds to perform magic without use of wands, these are stupid examples but it will be interesting to see what she cooks up for HRH. I'm sure it's going to be amazing, simply because of Harry's uniqueness. Ladjables > ________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 20:27:39 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 20:27:39 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as a teacher In-Reply-To: <000001c17cab$867438a0$8be5f83e@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <9ujbjs+75du@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30769 > I know that we all love Hagrid and want him only the best, but do you think it?s right from Dumbledore to let him teach Care of Magical Creatures? I think this is an interesting question. Given the nature of this position and the fact that Hagrid was effectively expelled (even if I was for bogus and trumped-up charges) therefore prohibiting him from using magic, isn't it dangerous to give a class of magical creatures to someone who is not autorized to intervene magically if things get out of control? Do you suppose at sometime after Hargrid's expulsion from Hogwarts that Dumbledore took it upon himself to finish Hagrids training personallyk albeit in secret and "unofficially"? Andrea (who will be much like Hagrid and out of a job if she doesn't get back to work!!) From masi.simonen at kolumbus.fi Tue Dec 4 22:01:50 2001 From: masi.simonen at kolumbus.fi (Simonen) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:01:50 +0200 Subject: Who will Die, Neville Message-ID: <000001c17d10$02742780$e0e5f83e@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 30770 Someone said "history repeats itself" and people compare the trio and Neville to the Marauders. So, I?ve always thougt that it?s James - Harry, Sirius - Ron, Remus - Hermione and Peter - Neville. This would mean that Harry would die and Neville would turn evil. Obviously, the similarities and differences between Neville and Peter have been discussed here a lot. I?d sure like to believe that we know enough about Neville to think he?ll not turn like Peter, but I?m a little scared about that... Also, I think you guys take Ron?s jealousy too seriously. RON IS NOT THE EVIL ONE! He doesn?t talk to Harry for a while, but I can sort of understand him. And I think what Sirius did as a youngster was _much_ worse, when he almost killed Snape. Still he isn?t the DE. Remember, Ron is Harry?s best friend. When Harry?s alone with Hermione, he certainly misses Ron, but in the Burrow Harry doesn?t seem to miss Hermione very much. I admit that it hurts to think Harry dying, but nothing denies it either in canon. Of course, this theory is far-fetched. Especially Neville doesn?t have the same position than Peter. The trio never includes him in anything important. The Marauders were a quartet, HRH is a trio. Which leeds me to another subject, is Neville a bit lonely? There?s HRH, then Seamus and Dean and then Lavender and Parvati. Is he left outside? There?s perhaps Ginny, but otherwise...Any thougts? From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:09:02 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (Heather Moore) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:09:02 -0000 Subject: DADA prof. In-Reply-To: <9ujb68+qstm@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujhhu+flg6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30771 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Monique" wrote: > Can't you imagine the first day off class. It's been rumored that the > new DADA teacher is a woman. In all their hormonal glory, the boys > have speculated on what exotic adventurer they might get. Low and > behold it's the old lady that smells like cabbage. > > Works for me. ;-) > > -Monique Funny! But what if Arabella Figg isn't *really* an old cabbagey lady, but is instead a Really Hot Older Woman a la Ann-Margret or Raquel Welch? What if the "cabbagey old lady" getup was always just a ruse to keep Petunia Dursley from recognizing that boncy school chum of Lily's who came to visit over Christmas Holidays when Lily was sixteen and snogged Petunia's then-boyfriend? That tarty little freak! She must have... have... spelled him or something!! Certainly wouldn't have left Harry with *her* if she'd had any idea -- well, it just goes to show, and it's no wonder Lily's brat has turned out so horrid, with *those* kinds of influences. And imagine Harry's cognitive dissonance when they *do* enter the classroom to find this pretty woman (not quite young enough to distract them from their studies, though...) waiting to introduce herself - say, she looks kind of familiar, but he can't put his finger on it... -- as "Arabella Figg." Okay, far-fetched. But wouldn't it be fun? From Calypso8604 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 22:12:15 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:12:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabber's first appearance Message-ID: <3d.15877c31.293ea43f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30772 In a message dated 12/4/2001 1:26:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com writes: > I don't know. If when Peter changed into a rat, he thought > completely like a rat, how would he remember to change to his human > form? We know from Sirius that one's mental state changes when you > assume animal form, but it is hard for me to believe that it would > completely change. It seems like you would have to retain some sort > of human conciousness. In QTTA there was a paragraph about wizards not being able to fly yet. In this paragraph it said that the few wizards who *did* expirience flight were those who had a bat animagus or some other flying creature. The paragraph goes on to state that this wasn't even an advantage as the person also had a bat brain and soon forgot where they were going Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From blpurdom at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:12:56 2001 From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (Barb) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:12:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper (Was: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor's Heir) In-Reply-To: <9ujbp5+4d34@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujhp8+ehsn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30773 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., mss4a at c... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ladjables at y... wrote: > "But doesn't Voldemort know Harry is with his relatives? Or does > the Fidelius Charm merely conceal location? Which leads to the > next question, who is the secret-keeper? Does V know it's > Dumbledore and that's why V says it's thanks to Dumbledore he > can't get to Harry while he's at his relatives? Because he knows > he will never get the information out of Dumbledore? I guess > that was a few questions!" > > Personally I think Mrs. Figg is the secret-keeper. That's one possibility if the Fidelius Charm is indeed what is protecting Harry at the Dursleys, rather than some older, deeper magic having to do with blood ties (meaning that, for Harry's safety, Petunia is the most important person in the household, Dudley being a close second). The problem is, we don't know enough about what the Fidelius Charm protects against, just how it works. This is from page 205 of the American hardback of PoA: "How does that work?" said Madam Rosmerta, breathless with interest. Professor Flitwick cleared his throat. "An immensely complex spell," he said squeakily, "involving the magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, and is henceforth impossible to find--unless, of course the Secret- Keeper chooses to divulge it. As long as the Secret-Keeper refused to speak, You-Know-Who could search the village where Lily James were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his nose pressed against their sitting room window!" Flitwick does not say that the spell only keeps people of evil intent from knowing where the protected parties are--so unless we subsequently learn that this is indeed the type of protection conferred by the charm, it is highly doubtful that Harry's protection is from the Fidelius Charm and that Mrs. Figg or anyone else is a Secret Keeper. Ron and the twins never would have been able to rescue Harry using the Flying Ford Anglia if the Fidelius Charm were in effect, and certainly Mr. Weasley could never have received permission from the Ministry to temporarily add the Dursleys' fireplace to the Floo network. Harry's protection must be a spell that specifically protects against dark magic or someone with ill intent, and therefore he cannot be under the protection of the Fidelius Charm, which does not seem to distinguish between these two types of people, as far as we know. --Barb Get Psyched Out! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb From joeblackish at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:19:19 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:19:19 -0000 Subject: Evil female character Message-ID: <9uji57+g8sl@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30774 Perhaps the alleged "truly evil female character" from GoF was actually Rita Skeeter. While she is at the moment more annoying than anything else, I think that her blatant disregard for how much she is hurting people through her articles suggests the potential for her to be truly evil. We know that she desperately wants to sell as many papers and magazines as possible, thus her irresponsible and sensationalist journalism. This thirst for success combined with her apparent lack of morality makes me wonder if we may see our special correspondent in future books fighting for Voldemort's team. It does not seem a stretch to me at all that Rita could become far more malicious than she h From cureluv88 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 21:34:50 2001 From: cureluv88 at hotmail.com (cureluv88 at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:34:50 -0000 Subject: Plot Twist Clues (WAS Dumbledore's gleam(long)) In-Reply-To: <9ujcbf+v7hp@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujfhq+doej@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30775 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > Originally, I thought there were few clues to JKR's big plot twists, > particularly Crouch/Moody. But there actually are many subtle clues, > often with just a bit of misdirection. The misdirection often seems > to come in the form of characters disbelieving or discounting the > clues. > I'm sure there are others, but I can't think of any more at the > moment. > > Cindy (determined not to be fooled in OoP) One clue that I noticed in GoF is when Sirius is talking about seeing Barty Crouch Jr. in while he was in prison. Sirius states specifically that he saw Barty being buried after he died, and this seemed like such a definite thing to say that I wondered if it would be contradicted. (Kind of like how when you take a true or false quiz, a clue that something is false is if the statement includes words like "always" or "never.") I, too, will go through OoP carefully and thoroughly. Liz From gwynyth at drizzle.com Tue Dec 4 21:17:31 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:17:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron & Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <14a.522b1f2.293e95d4@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30776 On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 Chelsea2162 at aol.com wrote: > i dont think that that'd be true, because Ron and Dumbledore have different > personaltites. Ron has more of a temper, and seems to be lacking > self-confidence, while Dumbledore rarely loses his temper, and seems very > self content I'm not entirely sure they have the same personality, but the issues you raise wouldn't be the deciding factor for me. Dumbledore is about 135 years older than Ron - if he *hadn't* learned self-confidence and how to control his temper by that point, I'd be rather suprised. Ron has always struck me as quite a reasonable teenager. No, he's not perfect. Yes, he gets upset when his best friend consistently gets the limelight, including in areas where Ron wishes he shone. (Quidditch) Yes, he gets upset when Draco is being a particular git. That's all relatively normal teenage stuff, in my opinion. It's also stuff that many people grow out of (and that you can see Ron working on dealing with and getting a grip on the jealousy, in particular.) We don't see Dumbledore doing the same - in large part because we don't exactly see Dumbledore as a teenager, for one, and also because we don't see a whole lot of Dumbledore's personal life, for two. But it strikes me that as a teenager, they might have been quite a bit more similar. They do strike me as similar in a certain sense of attitude - and I'm not quite sure how to explain this, except to say that it makes sense to me. There's something about their sense of priorities, in general, and their take on what's important in the world that makes sense. And a certain similarity in humor. I'd have to really go through the books with a fine tooth comb to figure out what specifically was hitting me that way, however. -Jenett From Calypso8604 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 22:20:11 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:20:11 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dead Narrative Sources in lit Message-ID: <34.1ef23571.293ea61b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30777 Actually, the first chapter of GoF *is* sort of in Harry's PoV...He dreamed that entire scene. It is unclear as to how much is what Harry saw(dreamt) and how much, if any, is a different perspective Calypso In a message dated 12/4/2001 3:10:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, heathernmoore at yahoo.com writes: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., raolin1 at h... wrote: > > > > > > > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died > > do > > > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > > > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR > > to > > > change who is going to die but we can all hope! > > > > > > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... > > > > Joshua Dyal > > HP woudn't be the first story to use this sort of narrative twist anyway. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:07:37 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:07:37 -0000 Subject: Plot Twist Clues (WAS Dumbledore's gleam(long)) In-Reply-To: <9ujeq0+egtn@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujhf9+a25r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30778 > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > > > > Originally, I thought there were few clues to JKR's big plot twists, particularly Crouch/Moody. The most blatant clue in GoF, IMHO, is when Harry's name comes out of the Goblet of Fire. Crouch/Moody strolls in and explicitly tells us exactly how he put Harry's name into the goblet: > > "They hoodwinked a very powerful magical object!" said Moody. "It would have needed an exceptionally strong Confundus Charm to bamboozle that goblet into forgetting that only three schools compete in the tournament . . . I'm guessing they submitted Potter's name under a fourth school, to make sure he was the only one in his category." I simply accepted this as "Moody" speaking in his capacity as an ex- Auror, someone who would have had experience with Dark wizards and their skills--look at Moody's physical state! I believe Dumbledore could have said Moody's exact words too, and they would have sailed over me as well. > > Another one (I think) is when Crouch/Moody turns Draco into a ferret. McGonagall asks him whether Dumbledore told him transfiguration wasn't to be a punishment, and Crouch/Moody doesn't know this. This is another clue that he isn't who we think he is. > But doesn't this fit in with Mad-Eye Moody's character? Fred or George describes him as a nutter, and even JKR said the real Moody will be more colourful than Crouch's Moody. Who knows what would makes Moody fly off the handle. I also assumed Moody chose to ignore any briefings he had on how to treat students. Was it ever stated that he was a teacher? > > Cindy (determined not to be fooled in OoP) > I know no matter how hard I try JKR will fool me every time! And that's the way I like it! Ladjables From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:09:01 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:09:01 -0000 Subject: Plot Twist Clues (WAS Dumbledore's gleam(long)) In-Reply-To: <9ujeq0+egtn@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujhht+e71q@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30779 > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > > > > Originally, I thought there were few clues to JKR's big plot twists, particularly Crouch/Moody. The most blatant clue in GoF, IMHO, is when Harry's name comes out of the Goblet of Fire. Crouch/Moody strolls in and explicitly tells us exactly how he put Harry's name into the goblet: > > "They hoodwinked a very powerful magical object!" said Moody. "It would have needed an exceptionally strong Confundus Charm to bamboozle that goblet into forgetting that only three schools compete in the tournament . . . I'm guessing they submitted Potter's name under a fourth school, to make sure he was the only one in his category." I simply accepted this as "Moody" speaking in his capacity as an ex- Auror, someone who would have had experience with Dark wizards and their skills--look at Moody's physical state! I believe Dumbledore could have said Moody's exact words too, and they would have sailed over me as well. > > Another one (I think) is when Crouch/Moody turns Draco into a ferret. McGonagall asks him whether Dumbledore told him transfiguration wasn't to be a punishment, and Crouch/Moody doesn't know this. This is another clue that he isn't who we think he is. > But doesn't this fit in with Mad-Eye Moody's character? Fred or George describes him as a nutter, and even JKR said the real Moody will be more colourful than Crouch's Moody. Who knows what would makes Moody fly off the handle. I also assumed Moody chose to ignore any briefings he had on how to treat students. Was it ever stated that he was a teacher? > > Cindy (determined not to be fooled in OoP) > You know, hindsight is always 20/20. I know no matter how hard I try JKR will fool me in all the upcoming books! And that's the way I like it! Ladjables From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 21:07:57 2001 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:07:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's gleam(long) In-Reply-To: <9uj5rh+38ic@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujdvd+79lr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30780 Ladjables:"My point (and I do have one) is that someone as brilliant as Dumbledore, if he were evil, would never let the mask slip. He is as unfathomable as they come." You're probably right, but I can' believe Dumbledore is evil. If he is, then Rowling has done a terrible disservice to her readers. It would teach her younger readers that *No one is to be trusted, and everybody will betray you sooner or later. *Good is unreal and an illusion, evil is real. *This world is no damn good. *Don't believe in anything. So far JKR has been consistently on the side of good fighting evil. How could she do a 180? It might be the ending for our cynical age, but I would want no part of it, and I don't think JKR is doing it. Ladjables:"Dumbledore had reasons for letting Harry see that gleam of triumph that disappears so quickly. It's great that we can ponder its meaning but if Harry saw it too, I don't think Dumbledore is evil. It's not JKR's style to let the hero in on the secret." I don't agree Dumbledore *let* Harry see 'the gleam'. I've already said my reasons I reject the notion Dumbledore is evil. JKR didn't let Harry in on any secret, either. Instead, she gave him, and us, another mystery. Now here's a moral dilemna: Suppose you were Dumbledore and just noticed that Voldemort had made his greatest and fatal mistake, the one that would lead to his ultimate downfall, by taking Harry's blood into himself. The kicker is that Voldemort's downfall (at least through his blood-bond with Harry) will lead unavoidably to Harry's death. Do you sacrifice one very special young wizard to save hundreds or thousands in the wizard world? From Calypso8604 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 23:01:12 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:01:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who will Die, Neville Message-ID: <24.1d750817.293eafb8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30781 In a message dated 12/4/2001 5:05:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, masi.simonen at kolumbus.fi writes: > Someone said "history repeats itself" and people compare the trio and > Neville to the Marauders. > > > > Which leeds me to another subject, is Neville a bit lonely? There?s HRH, > then Seamus and Dean and then Lavender and Parvati. Is he left outside? > There?s perhaps Ginny, but otherwise...Any thougts? > I wrote something about Generation Parallels on this list once....History cannot repeat *exactly* or that wouldn't be a good story. I think that the change in the gererations is Neville, who will prove to be a hero rather than a betrayer Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From joeblackish at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 23:03:08 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:03:08 -0000 Subject: Look of Triumph/Gleam in D's Eye Message-ID: <9ujknc+cfgg@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30782 I've been trying to catch up on my posts and the topic of Dumbledore's gleam in the eye at the end of GoF seems to come up fairly often. I personally think that this suggests Voldemort has made some sort of mistake in using Harry's blood which we will find out about later. A little more of the "ancient magic" we keep hearing about. Anyway, when this topic is being discussed, I have not so far noticed anyone bringing up that Crouch Jr. also reacts oddly when he finds out the Dark Lord took Harry's blood. I don't have a copy with me (I had to return it to the library - I'd renewed it too many times), but if I remember correctly, their conversation goes something like this. Crouch: And what did the Dark Lord take from you? Harry: My blood. Crouch then lets out his breath in a long, low hiss and then grabs Harry's arm to look at the cut. I think that Crouch also having such a strange reaction to this suggests that both he and Dumbledore must know something about why Voldemort should not have done that. After all, it wouldn't be the first time Voldemort had failed to consider fully what he was doing and it coming back to bite hi From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 23:08:42 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:08:42 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <9ujgeo+qoss@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujl1q+omn1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30783 Heather wrote: > Gaah, ooh, ick. Somehow the mental image of Quirdemort (Voldirrell?) taking especial notice of Harry's... uhm.... crotch vicinity.... is just striking me in my shuddery spot. To quote Velma, "Jinkies!" > Quirdemort works for me. By extension, then, we should stop saying Fake Moody and start saying Croody. Lee Hillman wrote: > > Out of curiosity, could it be that the reason some people don't like this > > alternative is because it means Dumbledore is playing God with Snape's life, > > sending him into a situation where there was a VERY good chance he wouldn't > > survive, and would die painfully to boot? > > No, the reason I personally have trouble with Snape-Returns-to-Spy is that JKR laid the foundation for this in such a straightforward way. It is almost like she wants us to spend two years selling ourselves on the idea and then . . . she's going to pull a fast one. I just want to be ready for something out of the ordinary -- particularly if it involves Snape being tortured early and often in OoP. Cindy From syrena at angelfire.com Tue Dec 4 22:25:05 2001 From: syrena at angelfire.com (Syrena) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:25:05 -0000 Subject: More Press for Snape! Message-ID: <9ujig1+gbuh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30784 Hello everyone, Snape's Society just got some press from a reporter who's interviewed JK Rowling herself. (huzzah!) I'm quoted in the middle of the article. For anyone who's interested in reading this article on Severus Snape, it's on the San Francisco Chronicle website here: http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/chonin/ It's good to see the reporters going nuts about Snape as well. They are beginning to learn what we already knew. >;) All the best, -Syrena Severus Snape's Slytherin Society http://jareth.com/severus.html From cureluv88 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 21:11:05 2001 From: cureluv88 at hotmail.com (cureluv88 at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:11:05 -0000 Subject: Neville In-Reply-To: <9uib14+fpk0@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uje59+nuco@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30785 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., LivBeatles at a... wrote: > < line and that he'll come out of his clumsy shell sooner or later once > he accepts his magical inheritance.>> We agree that Neville will play an important role in future books. Though there are parallels between Neville and Peter Pettigrew (as there are parallels between Harry and Voldemort), but JKR likes to point out to us that it is our choices, not our abilities that define us. So, we see Neville becoming something like the opposite of Peter. We could see him sacrificing himself, perhaps to save Harry. Any ideas? Liz and Sandi From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:48:23 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:48:23 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper (Was: Voldemort, Harry, Gryffindor'... In-Reply-To: <14.1eb2c77b.293e9867@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ujjrn+cd26@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30786 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Chelsea2162 at a... wrote: > ladjables, i thikn you got it....i was sitting around trying to figure out > who could possibly be the secret-keeper for harry, if he ad the dursleys were > under the fidelius charm, and then i read your response and you said > mrs.figg...ah ha! Alas, Chelsea, it was mss4a who came up with Mrs. Figg, I guessed Dumbledore! But I also think Barb's logic is correct(I hope I got your name right myself), that it is ancient blood magic, "deeper magic from the dawn of time", that is protecting Harry. The Fidelius charm always confused me, because I thought it just meant specifically someone(Voldemort)who was hunting down another person couldn't find them, but other people could. I guess that doesn't make sense. Ladjables From annahunny2000 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:53:05 2001 From: annahunny2000 at yahoo.com (annahunny2000 at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:53:05 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's Look of Triumph In-Reply-To: <9uhrki+3at4@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujk4h+3n69@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30787 >>On Another subject could anyone fill me in on >>their ideas on Dumbledore's "look of triumph" >>in the end of GoF? I have a couple but I'd love >>to hear others! I'm another new voice; I hope I'm not painfully repetitive of previous postings, but... My initial instinct when I read that passage about Dumbledore's look of triumph was that some how the ancient/primordal magic that Harry's mother used to infuse Harry with a protection against Voldemort would somehow infect Voldemort when he uses Harry's blood. That some type of debt relationship (like Dumbledore talks about being created between Harry and Pettigrew when Harry spared his life) would be created between Harry and Voldemort by Voldemort's use of Harry's blood. There are already unusual coincidencidental similarities between Harry and Voldemort -- the wands, being orphaned, very powerful, being able to speak to snakes, etc. I wonder if Voldemort played Quidditch. Enjoying the discussions immensely! Annalisa From cureluv88 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 21:18:18 2001 From: cureluv88 at hotmail.com (cureluv88 at hotmail.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:18:18 -0000 Subject: Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying In-Reply-To: <200112041547.KAA05647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ujeiq+k6qn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30788 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > I could, however, see him going apathetic, and not being there at a > critical time when Harry needs his help. Not actively helping Voldemort, > but not helping Harry, either. And that might be a bigger evil. Another possibility for Ron is that, in an attempt to have some glory of his own, he may try to do something (to fight Voldemort) by himself that would be very dangerous. Could this be a time when the clock in the Weasley's house would point to mortal peril? Liz and Sandi From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Tue Dec 4 21:43:23 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 16:43:23 -0500 Subject: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover References: <1007498629.4011.94465.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0D437B.7E58A9F8@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30789 Jamie wrote: > However, if Snape truly believes > that Lucius has repented of his DE days, it would make sense for > Snape to favor Draco.... Now *there's* something to watch for in OoP. If Snape starts giving signs that he's not so completely fond of Draco as before, we're onto something. OTOH, as Gwendolyn points out in her amazing post, if Snape is still trying to string along V. & the DEs, he won't be able to change his behavior toward Draco at all. Even if he was surprised about Lucius. Personally, I didn't read that scene (in the hospital at the end of GoF) that way on my first read. I thought Snape was trying to keep Harry from telling Fudge any more, for any of a variety of good reasons. But once the die was cast, Snape threw in and supported Harry's story in an admirable (and dangerous) way. It's one of the few scenes where he isn't in any way nasty to Harry-- and in fact, they are clearly on the same side. I'm still pondering the significance of their final scene together at the Leaving Feast, in which their eyes meet and Snape looks away first.... Cindy's theory about Snape admitting to V. that he let the Dementor get Crouch, Jr. is inspired, but again seems a bit spur-of-the-moment for what seems to have been a long-laid contingency plan. Elizabeth (Who can, in fact, tolerate the idea that Snape had a secret "thing" for Lily, but doesn't see that as a necessary motivation for him being or not being a DE or spy. Just a convenient excuse for why he loathes Harry so much.) From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Tue Dec 4 23:14:53 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 18:14:53 -0500 Subject: Harry Potter, the 10 commandments, and "witches" [very long] Message-ID: <3C0D58ED.200835F7@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30790 Hi folks, Once upon a time I was on another list that purported to be HP for Grownups (though it wasn't). I wrote and posted a version of the following, which was reasonably well received. I thought I'd post it here and see what you all thought. As far as I know, this hasn't been done for the whole list of ten before, though I understand someone else started the job. Doubtless they did a better job than I will do, but hey, it's something. I did search the lexicon on "commandments" and didn't find anything. So here goes.... -- This is intended as a brief analysis of the "morality" of the Harry Potter books based on whether/how often the major protagonists violate the ten commandments (plus an extra section at the end on witches and divination). Naturally, this is a pretty limited standard by which to measure morality, even from a Christian point of view, but I'm just not up for a detailed analysis from a pseudo-pauline standpoint right now. And this is long enough. (Probably too long. Sorry.) Disclaimer: I'm a Quaker Universalist, which makes me either a very liberal Christian or not a Christian at all (depending on your point of view); I regard the Bible as a semi-historical record of the efforts of a particular culture to understand the divine. Whether or not you, the reader, agree with me on this may affect your opinion of what I write, naturally enough. These are only the interpretations of one amateur theologian, not meant as definitive. Feel free to hit "delete" now. :) Additional note: my Bible is the Revised Standard. Ok, here we go with the commandments themselves, in order: 1 - You shall have no other gods before me No problem here, really. The Harry Potter universe seems to be devoid of any references to God or religion. (Some might say that *that* is a major problem, but my guess is that Rowling is simply avoiding identifying with any particular church or sect. And the books haven't said so far what the inhabitants of Hogswart do on Sundays. They do celebrate Christmas, which I find interesting.) 2 - You shall not make for yourself a graven image... Again, no problem. One might argue that the statue of Salazar Slytherin in the Chamber of Secrets counts, but the one using it is Tom Riddle/Voldemort, so we can hardly blame Harry & co. for his actions. 3 - You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. Nobody does this in the books, that I can see. Maybe it's in the dialogue that JKR leaves out, to which Hermione responds, "Ron!" but we don't need to assume that, as there are plenty of other things he could have said to get that reaction. 4 - Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Again, perhaps they do, and Rowling simply doesn't mention it. Not all days are accounted for. (Ok, that one's a stretch, but we needn't assume they don't keep the Sabbath, either.) 5 - Honor your father and your mother... I think it's clear that Harry honors the memory of his parents. Indeed, hearing others dishonor them is one of the few things that can put him over the edge, e.g. at the beginning of PoA when he blows up Aunt Marge. It can be argued that he has not always acted out of respect for the sacrifice they made for him, and in fact Lupin makes this point in PoA, to Harry's great shame. Harry is not perfect-- he's a child, after all, but he knows right from wrong. Arguably, he doesn't honor his parental replacements, the Dursleys. On the other hand, they don't treat him as their child. He certainly does respect Dumbledore and McGonnagal, whom I feel are much more valid candidates for in loco parentis, as the headmaster of the school and head of his house. Probably he should trust them more, and go to them earlier when he runs into trouble, but I think his history of not having adults who were trustworthy amply explains his unreadiness to trust even such helpful adults. On the other hand, this behavior of his isn't held up to the reader as being particularly good. See below for more on this. 6 - You shall not kill. Not only doesn't Harry kill anyone, but he stops Black and Lupin from killing someone whom he has every reason to despise. None of the other protagonists have verifiably killed anyone yet, either. Voldemort, on the other hand, is clearly identified as a villain by his disregard for the lives of others. 7 - You shall not commit adultery. Well, all the kids are a bit young for this, I guess (and we don't know if any of the staff are married). Certainly nothing is mentioned in the texts. 8 - You shall not steal. Ok. This is one with some substance to it. But I would argue, overall, that Rowling is slowly building the realization in Harry & co. (and the readers) that theft isn't going to solve any of their problems. This, in my mind, makes the books *more* moral, not less. Let's look at some specific examples. Borrowing the car in CoS was foolish, but Harry and Ron had every expectation that Ron's parents would be able to retrieve the car later, so I don't think that's exactly stealing, either. In any case, it was clear that both Harry and Ron were made to understand just how spectacularly bad an idea this was. Harry, Ron, and Hermione definitely stole boomslang skin and some other ingredients from Snape in CoS. It was an ill-thought venture, and I would argue that they subsequently saw the error of their ways. After all, it didn't get them the information they needed, and caused Hermione a lot of trouble. (The whole polyjuice incident seems to have been a setup for GoF, anyway.) The business about getting food from the house-elves doesn't sound like stealing to me, even though everyone calls it that-- the house-elves are happy enough to give the food to them, and Dumbledore never lists the kitchens as being off-limits in his annual speeches. Dumbledore himself tells Harry that James had primarily used the Invisibility Cloak to steal food (end of PS/SS) and gives the cloak to Harry anyway. Notably, Harry *doesn't* steal items from Hogsmead, even though he could easily have done so while wearing the cloak of invisibility. I don't think liberating Buckbeak in PoA counts, either. He seems to have belonged to either Hagrid or the school, and Dumbledore told the kids to do it in any case. Presumably Dumbledore would have the capacity to give Buckbeak to anyone he chose, if he's the school's property, and Hagrid would have simply set Buckbeak loose, if he'd thought that would help. Dobby does steal gillyweed on Harry's behalf in GoF. Harry didn't ask him to, and probably wouldn't have accepted the theft for any reason other than to save Ron's life (he thought). And as it turns out that this wasn't necessary, I think Harry regrets having taken Dobby's "assistance"-- surely Snape must know where the gillyweed came from, and Harry knows he doesn't need any more trouble from Snape. The best case against any of the protagonists, as someone else pointed out to me once, is probably Fred and George stealing the Marauder's Map from Filch. Note that this is the only real theft that can be pinned on even these two. And they're probably the biggest rule-breakers of the bunch. The Marauder's Map is an especially interesting plot device that Rowling makes use of for a number of purposes, and it's interesting in terms of this topic, as well. Can something be stolen from someone who was never the rightful owner in the first place? I'm not arguing that two wrongs make a right, but certainly Filch wasn't willingly given the Map by anyone who legitimately owned it, and Fred and George were aware of that when they took it. In fact, it can be argued that the one with the strongest claim at the time it comes into Harry's hands is Harry himself. He is the only descendent of the original makers, all of whom have since left the school. It would appear that "Mooney, Paws, Wormtail & Prongs" gave the map to one of the other students before they left, and subsequently it was taken by Filch. Fred and George don't know who made the map, of course. But they do willingly give it to Harry for no other purpose than because they like him and feel sorry for him for being confined to Hogwarts when his other friends are out having fun in Hogsmeade. I guessI feel that this benevolence on their part balances out their having taken the thing in the first place. Mind, this was misplaced goodwill on their part-- as Lupin and Snape make clear later. But even Lupin feels that Harry should have the map, once the threat everyone thought Sirius had represented was past. So in my view (which is not black and white), this isn't a serious case of theft. 9 - You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. Note that this doesn't say "lie." Harry and the others certainly haven't been bearing false witness. But I'll go further and address Harry's truthfullness in general. I think he's a notably truthful boy, actually. He does lie on a small number of occasions. He generally regrets it instantly or shortly afterward, and Rowling usually doesn't let him gain anything from his moments of untruthfulness. In the first book, he goes along with a lie Hermione tells, about the troll. I think he was too surprised to do much else, on this occasion. He also deliberately lies to Quirrell/Voldemort about what he sees in the Mirror of Erised. Generally I'm not one for relative morality arguments, but in this case, telling the truth to Voldemort would definitely have been a greater evil than lying about what he'd seen. He tells Dumbledore he has nothing to tell him, in CoS, when actually he's been hearing the basilisk for a while at that point. (He later realizes the error of this action, and even at the time, he doesn't feel good about the deception.) He and Ron tell McGonnagal that they are trying to visit Hermione, when actually they are looking for clues. Again, I think by the end of CoS Harry and his friends are starting to realize that they should have gone to Dumbledore earlier, rather than trying to deal with all this on their own. And the readers have a chance to realize that Harry & co. don't always make the best decisions. Harry outright lies to Snape about where he got the items he bought in Hogsmead in PoA (and unfortunately, involves Ron in this lie as well). And Lupin gives him a lecture that makes him thoroughly ashamed of *that* whole adventure. Again, the readers are clear that Harry has made an error, and knows it. Probably the most extended bout of lying he commits is his set of homework for Trelawney in PoA. I'm not sure what to think of this set of incidents, as she's essentially asked for the impossible. (Trelawney is also not treated as a respectable adult by any of the protagonists, even the other adults-- see below.) But I would say that overall Harry and his friends are steadily learning that lying is not a good idea. And the adult protagonists of the series have definitely stressed the virtue of truth (Dumbledore, in particular). 10 - You shall not covet [other people's stuff] I think the only thing Harry has seriously coveted was the Firebolt, and he seemed to get over it (even before Sirius sent him one). Arguably he was obsessed by the Mirror of Erised, but he managed to break free of that, as well. Admittedly, it's hard to put this to the test, as he's used to nothing at the Dursley's, and he's quite wealthy in the wizard world. But he really doesn't seem like a greedy kid. Arguably, he covets Ron's family-- but he doesn't want to take anything away from Ron, either, so I'm not sure that counts. Now, as a special extra bonus, I'd like to address the "witch" and "divination" issues. For reference, there's a website that does a rundown of the Wiccan religion with respect to Christianity that I thought had some points that applied to Harry Potter, as well-- though I recognize that the Harry Potter books are not Wiccan, and neither is Rowling. It's just that the heat directed at the HP books seems to be largely based on the fact that they're about "witches", so it seemed that the same arguments would apply. Here's the URL: http://www.religioustolerance.org/witchcr5.htm The section of this site that I find particularly interesting goes back to the original Hebrew and Greek terms included in the Bible, and later translated into other languages (including English). I feel that going to the Bible to find out what it has to say about these issues is the best way to address them, and going to the oldest possible sources is the best approach to that. Quoting from this site, here are two sections of interest: On Witches: -- Most conservative Christians believe that the Bible contains many specific condemnations of Witchcraft, and that these denunciations apply to Wicca as well. (e.g. Exodus 22:18 - "Thou shalt not allow a Witch to live.") Liberal theologians point out that the word in the Hebrew Scriptures that is commonly translated as Witch or Witchcraft really refers to the practice of reciting curses which are intended to hurt or kill other people. The Greek word in the Christian Scriptures that is translated Witch is unrelated to Wicca. It would be better translated as "one who concocts potions to kill people," or simply "poisoner." -- Even Snape, who certainly claims to be able to "stopper death," isn't going around poisoning people. And the "Unforgivable Curses" are called that for a reason. The worst Harry and the other protagonists do is the full-body bind (and Hermione feels just awful about it). Even against Voldemort, Harry doesn't try to use the death curse. Only the villains are evil by this standard-- and in fact, it is a big part of what defines them as evil. Harry and the others do, however, learn some "hexes" that cause someone to slow down, be covered with boils, feel ticklish all over, etc. I guess it depends on where you draw the line in defining "hurt". On Divination: -- There are many verses in the Bible that prohibit certain methods for foretelling the future by the ancient Israelites. These include Exodus 22:18, Leviticus 19:26-26; 19:31; 20:6; Deuteronomy 18:10-11; Isaiah 8:19 and Malachai 3:5. Of these, Deuteronomy 18 is perhaps the most important. They forbade the Israelites from engaging in eight specific practices. Various translations of the Bible use various ambiguous terms or phrases here: augur, black magic, calls up the dead, charmer, consults with spirits, divination, enchanter, fortune teller, interpret omens, look for omens, magician, medium, necromancer, observer of times, sorcerer, soothsayer, spiritist, weaves or casts spells, witchcraft, and wizard. The terms magician, sorcerer, spiritist, and witch have many different meanings. Clearly, translators have had a great deal of difficulty selecting unique English words or short phrases to match the Hebrew text. Returning to the original words: 1.yid'oni Making contact with spirits (not of God). This would probably forbid the New Age practice of channeling. 2.sho'el 'ov Making contact with the dead. This would probably prohibit a medium from contacting the dead, as in Spiritualism. 3.qosem q'samim Foretelling the future by using lots. This would condemn casting runes, using the I Ching or a similar system 4.m'onen Predicting the future by interpreting signs in nature. (e.g. predicting the harshness of a winter by looking at moss on trees, or fur thickness on animals in the wild, or whether the groundhog sees his shadow) 5.m'nachesh Enchanting (perhaps related to nachash, a snake; i.e. snake charming) 6.chover chavar Casting evil spells by magical knot tying 7.m'khaseph evil sorcery; using spoken spells to harm other people 8.doresh 'el hametim Literally "One who asks the dead", probably via another method than sho'el 'ov -- None of the protagonists have deliberately done any of these things, unless we count chatting with the ghosts who are all over the castle, who don't seem inclined or able to make predictions. It's clear that the major adult characters regard divination as chancy at best and generally not something to respect or rely on. And the kids have learned the pointlessness of divination as well, as a result of their class with Trelawney. (Perhaps that's why Trelawny is kept on as a teacher-- something I've often wondered about.) The centaurs do read stars, but they aren't human, and I'm not sure what laws should apply to them. They don't tell anyone else what they see, in any case (except for cryptic remarks: "Mars is bright tonight.") Harry is also quite clear on the futility of trying to communicate with the dead, as revealed in his experiences with the Mirror of Erised in book 1 and the Dementors in PoA. He knows that hearing his parents' last words again won't bring them back. He didn't deliberately bring back their "shadows" in the wand duel with Voldemort, and knows there's no point in trying to cause that to happen again. It is true that Harry talks with snakes. I'm not convinced his actions at the zoo or in the dueling club count as "charming," though. He doesn't control or direct the snake. Even at the dueling club, I'm not sure he can be said to have "charmed" the snake. (And Dumbledore seems to feel that Harry's ability in this regard is a leftover from Voldemort's attack.) It's interesting that Harry takes the rap for the same kind of offense that the Bible warns against; in the wizard world, conversing with snakes is about as well looked upon as it is in conservative Christian circles. I'll sum this up as follows: In general, I feel Harry and the other protagonists of the series are generally quite moral according to the Biblical references I've quoted here. When they fail, this is typically pointed out to the readers and the characters come to see that their actions were wrong and/or inadvisable. In my mind, this is the reason most of these rules were set down in the first place: because they are bad habits to get into, generally because they undermine our trust in one another. In short, it's hard to see what the fuss is about. I'd be happy to have any kids in my care pay as much attention to good and evil, right and wrong as Harry and his friends do (though I'd prefer none of them to have to deal with as big an immediate evil threat as Voldemort, obviously). Peace, Elizabeth =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ "I hold that skepticism is a religious duty; men [and women] should question their theology, and doubt more in order that they might believe more." -- Lucretia Mott, from a speech at the Free Religious Association on June 2, 1871. (_Lucretia Mott: Her Complete Speeches and Sermons_. Dana Greene, Edwin Mellon Press, 1980, p360). From Calypso8604 at aol.com Tue Dec 4 22:26:28 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:26:28 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Other character perspectives (was Re: Damoclesian sword f... Message-ID: <7f.1e5c4d91.293ea794@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30791 In a message dated 12/4/2001 3:24:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, gwynyth at drizzle.com writes: > On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 raolin1 at hotmail.com wrote: > > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... > > I sort of see that as a special case, because immediately after that first > chapter, we see Harry waking up, having dreamed from those events, and > apparently from that perspective. Yes, that's what I thought. It was still sort of in Harry's POV... But! That is no reason that Harry will stay alive. JKR could very well kill him off in the last paragraph. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 22:34:40 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:34:40 -0000 Subject: Who will Die, Neville In-Reply-To: <000001c17d10$02742780$e0e5f83e@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <9ujj20+gj6r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30792 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Simonen" wrote: > Someone said "history repeats itself" and people compare the trio and Neville to the Marauders. So, I?ve always thougt that it?s James - Harry, Sirius - Ron, Remus - Hermione and Peter - Neville. This would mean that Harry would die and Neville would turn evil. Obviously, the similarities and differences between Neville and Peter have been discussed here a lot. I simply refuse to believe Neville will betray Harry. Like Ron, he has grown up in the wizarding world and raised on the story of V, even suffering at the hands of V himself. Neville has never hidden behind Ron and Harry like Peter did with Sirius and James, in fact singlehandedly attacked Crabbe and Goyle! I think he's made from stronger stuff. And I don't look for too many parallels between the Marauders and this gang, I think it's too simplistic for JKR, and as you said, they're a trio, with a girl too! > > Also, I think you guys take Ron?s jealousy too seriously. RON IS NOT THE EVIL ONE! He doesn?t talk to Harry for a while, but I can sort of understand him. And I think what Sirius did as a youngster was _much worse. Agreed Ron's jealousy is taken too seriously. There are definitely Ron/Sirius parallels, what with their tempers and characterizations as best friends. Don't rule out Ron doing something to Draco a la Sirius though! > > Which leeds me to another subject, is Neville a bit lonely? There?s HRH. Is he left outside? Something tells me Neville is quite introspective, since he has never told anyone about his parents. But Ron and Harry do look out for him quite a bit. Harry rescues his Remembrall and stands in his defense when Draco harrasses him, he and Ron pull Neville out of the faulty step on the stairs, give him passwords, Hermione helps him with his work. These may be little things but they are significant because it shows he isn't ignored. If he was why would anyone bother to pull him out of the step? Kids ignore each other all the time. It's also interesting that Neville is always telling them about his adventures with Snape, when he had detention with him, or Snape caught him in the hallway, if H and R weren't interested we would never hear about him. It will be interesting to see how Harry treats him in Book 5 now that he is aware of Neville's background. Ladjables From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 23:57:16 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:57:16 -0000 Subject: Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ujnss+opbq@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30793 Amber wrote: >Even though I even quail at > the thought of the current Hogwarts students trying the transformation, it'd > be very strange for one of them not to. I can imagine Harry writing Sirius > asking for pointers on the spell and such. And Sirius, well I can just > imagine him saying "Sure Harry! Go for it!". And Harry, the talented boy > that he is, would probably be able to pull it off. *sighs wearily* Okay, let > me steal myself for two more possible Animagi... > > There might be one very good reason why the trio does not let Sirius tutor them into becoming animagi (aside from the fact that Sirius is going to die in OoP and isn't going to be tutoring anyone about anything ). I suppose learning magic is like learning anything else. You can only accomplish so much, and in some ways, it is a zero sum game. If you spend three years learning to turn into an animal, there are things you won't have the time to learn. Like DADA and charms. Harry would be better served learning these things instead of trying to turn into a millipede or something. Cindy From cureluv88 at hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 22:44:35 2001 From: cureluv88 at hotmail.com (Liz) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:44:35 -0000 Subject: Harry as a ghost, Blood Baron In-Reply-To: <007301c17d0d$4d89ae00$53af1e3e@stephen> Message-ID: <9ujjkj+6tl5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30794 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Lucy Austin" wrote: > And as you can become a ghost, the last couple of paragraphs could still be from Harry's POV! I would hate him to die, but I have to admit I can quite easily see him sacrifcing himself to kill V and save the world etc. This isn't a terribly important point, just something that occurred to me. I don't think Harry would become a ghost if he were to die, as was suggested above. JKR mentioned something about how the people who become ghosts are people who were not very happy in life - or something like that - and then said we'd find out more in later books about why people become ghosts. This makes sense with Moaning Myrtle, at the very least. So it seems unlikely that Harry would become a ghost, because it would signify that his life ended on not the best terms, which I don't think JKR would do. Also on the subject of ghosts: the Bloody Baron. (This may have already been discussed recently and I missed it) I think it seem likely that he will play some sort of role in one of the future books. He's covered in blood, and he's the only person who can control Peeves. Any thoughts on that? Liz From cindysphynx at home.com Tue Dec 4 23:41:51 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:41:51 -0000 Subject: Moody , Mrs. Lestrange and Amos Diggory Message-ID: <9ujmvv+kh10@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30795 I was listening to the pensieve sequence in GoF again, and I noticed a few interesting things. In the first pensieve sequence, it is Karakaroff's interrogation, and Karkaroff notes that the Ministry is trying to round up "the last of the Dark Lord's supporters." Moody is present, and we learn that he caught Karkaroff. Harry notes Moody has two normal eyes, and later, Moody indicates the chunk missing from his nose. There's no mention of scarring or a wooden leg. In the second pensieve sequence, it is Bagman's trial. Moody is there, and Harry notes nothing new about his appearance. In the third pensieve sequence, Moody is absent. This is the sequence in which Mrs. Lestrange declares her devotion to Voldemort. I wonder if the progression of Moody's injuries tells us anything about how he lost his eye and leg, and how he received his scars and lost his back teeth. Perhaps Moody was involved in the hunt for the DEs who tortured Neville's parents. After all, Moody was one of the best aurors, the Longbottoms were popular, and Moody probably worked with Frank Longbottom. If Moody was involved with the arrest of Mrs. Lestrange and her crew, it seems clear Moody definitely came off worse in his fight with Mrs. Lestrange. Perhaps his absence at her trial was due to a rather extended stay at St. Mungo's. In that case, perhaps Mrs. Lestrange is so dark, so evil and so powerful that she makes the rest of the DEs look like pre-schoolers. ********* I was also wondering whether we've seen the last of Amos Diggory. In Rita Skeeter's final article, she writes, "Some fear that Potter might resort to the Dark Arts in his desperation to win the tournament . . . " Throughout GoF, I found Amos Diggory's attitude to be somewhat puzzling. He repeatedly taunts Harry about losing to Cedric at Quiddich, which is just plain rude. There aren't many grown men who would seize every opportunity to gloat to an adolescent boy about an athletic contest a year earlier. Diggory is also quite snippy with a house elf, which was also rather unnecessary. Amos is definitely the hot-head of the family. So why is Amos Diggory written to be such a jerk? Maybe he will turn out to play a role in OoP. From Amos' perspective, Harry showed up with Cedric's body and the Triwizard Cup after Rita has planted the idea that Harry would do anything to win. Krum, if asked, would have to say that he has no idea how he came under the Imperius Curse, but he does remember Harry stunning him to take him out of the tournament. Amos works at MoM, and would learn that Fudge believes Harry is crazy and dangerous, and that Voldemort has not returned. A grief-stricken Amos might side with those who say Harry killed Cedric simply to get to the Cup first. Given that there has been no mention in the Daily Prophet of Cedric's death, Rita's first story once she gets out of that glass jar might be an exclusive interview with the Diggories where Amos comes right out and accuses Harry of murder. Just a thought. Cindy (wondering if Harry's murder trial will be longer than two pages) From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Tue Dec 4 23:44:19 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:44:19 -0000 Subject: Wizard secrecy, Snape, Percy's choices Message-ID: <9ujn4j+4ver@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30796 Joshua Dyal wrote: > As a point of nit-pickiness, we don't actually know that this (fear of persecution) is why > the wizarding world is hidden. Arthur Weasley says it's because > wizards don't want to be bothered with coming up with magical > solutions for everybody's problems, although that's likely a > simplistic view. I feel a Philip Nel type question coming on: different characters give different reasons for the concealment of the wizarding world. What do these reasons tell us about these characters? Snape ----- Gwendolyn Grace wrote: > Why is it so important that Snape be able to worm his way back into > Voldemort's good graces? Because tactically, at the end of GoF, there is no > other course of action I can conceive that does him or Dumbledore any more > good than going back to be a spy again. If he does NOT, he openly declares > that his loyalty has shifted and all kinds of bad things happen. First of > all, he becomes a marked man. Secondly, the Slytherin students whose parents > are involved will no longer trust him, so he certainly ceases to be a > sounding board for them. Third, Dumbledore is once again left without a > source of information from Voldemort's camp. Fourth, he can't use Severus > any other way because the DE's will be looking for him, so he'd become a > virtual prisoner at Hogwarts. I agree that if Snape went back to Voldemort, it must be more or less as you say; and he goes as himself, not in disguise. But I'm not convinced these are cast-iron reasons. We don't know enough of Dumbledore's wider plans to know how Snape might be useful; although the DEs may be after Snape, V himself is not yet that powerful and it surely is possible for Snape to undertake quiet extra-Hogwarts missions that may be risky but not necessarily suicide; given that Dumbledore is plainly in control of his own school, what weight are DEs going to give to the presence of Snape? whether Dumbledore has a source of information is outside his control since we are debating whether the DEs could *still* believe Snape is one of them, not whether Snape would try to get *back* into V's good graces. > Say he goes to contact the Dementors or the vampires. Say even that they > promise to protect his life. Can Dementors behave in that sort of way? I don't believe that Dumbledore has any interest in contacting the Dementors. The idea that they are part of his task follows from the things Dumbledore mentions to Fudge: ally with the giants; remove Azkaban from the Dementors. When Fudge defaults (a possibility long foreseen by Dumbledore), Hagrid gets the first, Snape gets whatever D can salvage from the second: perhaps to investigate, in whatever way possible, what is going on between the imprisoned DEs and the Dementors. The Weasleys get the MOM as their task. Protection of Snape's life, insofar as he can't look after himself, remain's Dumbledore's responsibility. I would back Snape in a duel with any individual DE, though I grant ambushes and numerical odds could get him. My personal objection to the go-back-as-spy theory is that it's so obvious: JKR has just (in the context of the whole series) sprung on us that he was a DE; he then gets a frightening task from Dumbledore just after V has returned - it just feels so much like something JKR wants us to think that it can't actually be true. I realise that this type of argument can't really be used alongside the others - either we argue within the framework of the Potterverse, or we argue from the POV of literary probability. I agree totally about the irrelevance of his love life (wouldn't it be good if we find in OOP that he is, in fact, celebrating the fifteenth anniversary of his happy marriage to his childhood sweetheart?) and substantially on the DADA issue. However, I don't believe Hagrid's statement that Lockhart was the 'on'y man for the job' is conclusive: if Snape had informally approached Dumbledore and been turned down, he would not then apply formally, and Hagrid would never know. As an aside, I have never understood why the DADA post was thought to be jinxed that early in the series: only Quirrell has suffered at that time - a case of JKR unconsciously assuming the perspective of future events not known to the reader? On Snape as head of house, I feel a lot of ink has been spilt on what is a simple issue: does Dumbledore consider him up to the job? I don't believe he needs to consult or please anyone else: his accountability to the governors is of the all-or-nothing 'back me or sack me' kind. -------------------- Percy's choices: I'm sure Penny or one of the other P.I.N.E.s has pointed this out before, but there is a pleasing symmetry in JKR's famous statement about doing what is easy and doing what is right as far as he is concerned. I can see the situation developing where Percy will consider that he should take the hard decision to do the 'right thing' and follow MOM policy, rather than the 'easy thing' of going along with his parents' unofficial alliance with Dumbledore; in reality for him the hard thing is to recognise that ethical imperatives may outweigh the rules; the easy thing being to be legalistic. David From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Wed Dec 5 00:18:17 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (David) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 00:18:17 -0000 Subject: Parallels (was Neville) In-Reply-To: <9uje59+nuco@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujp49+p53d@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30797 Liz and Sandi wrote: > Though there are parallels between Neville and Peter Pettigrew (as > there are parallels between Harry and Voldemort), but JKR likes to > point out to us that it is our choices, not our abilities that define > us. I agree completely with this last point. Indeed, I think the whole idea of trying to draw parallels between Harry, Ron and Hermione on the one hand (OTOH!) and James, Sirius and Lupin on the other, is misconceived. Particularly the attempt to line the characters up against each other (e.g. Lupin = Hermione). Yes, JKR uses patterns in a remarkable way which we have never (in my time at any rate) analysed properly. (Look, for example, at the way we always get a glimpse of the DADA teacher *before* term starts, and then look how, having given us the pattern with Quirrell and Lockhart, she 'fades' it out slightly by not giving us Lupin till we are on the train, and fades it more by only putting Moody in the conversation between Diggory and the Weasleys. I think there's a lot of stuff like that, and it must mean something - like the way people in the bible always meet their wives by a well.) But no, it goes against the grain, not only of the point about choices, but also the uniqueness of the individual that is stressed in the wand choosing, the shape of the animagus, the shape of the patronus. The only person who uses these types of parallel to try to draw conclusions is Riddle - that should tell us something. It's just another example of the mental laziness involved in categorising, labelling, and then dismissing people that forms such a major theme of the books. When Dumbledore takes up the theme, he in effect says to Harry 'Yes, it's tempting to think that way, but it's misleading - the fact that you fit Salazar Slytherin's pattern tells you precisely *nothing*'. David, ranting partly because he's cross with Yahoo for swallowing his previous Snape post - I have saved a copy and will repost tomorrow if it hasn't appeared mwahahahaha From john at walton.vu Wed Dec 5 00:56:33 2001 From: john at walton.vu (John Walton) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 00:56:33 +0000 Subject: ADMIN: Warning: new virus: "Goner" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30798 Hi all. Got a Windows-running PC? Use Outlook Express? ICQ? IRC? Read on! Since a few members of the HPFGU community have recently been hit by viruses, the Moderator Team bring you some advice, courtesy of McAfee.com: Re: The Goner Virus. ============================================ This is a HIGH RISK virus that spread via Microsoft Outlook and can be spread via ICQ. This is a mass mailing worm that attempts to send itself to all entries in the Outlook Address book. The virus will arrive with the following email message: Subject: Hi Body: How are you ? When I saw this screen saver, I immediately thought about you I am in a harry, I promise you will love it! Attachment: GONE.SCR ============================================ Folks, as always, do NOT, repeat, DO NOT download any file from email unless you are absolutely positive what it is. This virus uses the .scr file format (Windows Screensaver), which is apparently very popular among Windows users. At any rate, you MUST update your virus software. If not, this worm WILL get through -- and delete your virus software (nasty, isn't it?) and various bits of your system. Remember, if you are infected, do not use your email program, IRC or ICQ until you are cleared, otherwise you risk spreading the virus. For more information: www.mcafee.com www.cert.org www.symantec.com Regards, --John, your Mac-using-yet-antivirus-program-loving Moderator With Rock #47 ____________________________________________ There will be an answer, let it be. in Memoriam George Harrison. John Walton -- john at walton.vu ____________________________________________ From meboriqua at aol.com Wed Dec 5 01:46:05 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (Jenny from Ravenclaw) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 01:46:05 -0000 Subject: House Elves: Enslaved by Mind? Message-ID: <9uju8t+ivcl@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30799 Okay. I just came up with this theory while I was in the shower and I thought it was great. I mean, I had to pat myself on the back for it. First, though, I must give much of the credit to David Frankis for putting the initial idea in my head. Second, I have to add a disclaimer that I believe that House Elves are enslaved and that their situation sucks. David sent me a note offlist about House Elves, with an interesting comment about Elves and clothes. He wondered if there may have been times when Winky, while still with the Crouches, was given an article of clothing by mistake (maybe for the laundry or to put away) and overlooked it because she believed she was happy with the Crouch family. Dobby, however, was eager to leave the Malfoys, probably sought the opportunity to do so before Harry helped him out and would have been gone with the wind if a pair of dirty undies had ever been handed directly to him. What if part of the tragedy of the House Elf situation is that their enslavement is in their minds? I mean, what if they have been utterly convinced that serving witches and wizards is their lot in life, but really, they can leave *whenver they want to*? What if there was no spell at all that kept them in servitude to their masters? Wouldn't that add a sad and complicated twist to the whole House Elf subplot? It's one thing to let someone free who was in prison for years, because that person was very much aware of her/his situation and knew that one day, their situation could change. However, it is much harder, IMO, to convince someone that their actual life situation is what is incarcerating her/him. I think it would be really interesting if that was what was going on all along with House Elves and Dobby was the first one to see the light. There is actually a chapter in "The Last Battle" that is similar; the ones who won't open their minds (if I recall properly) are the ones who are convinced they are living in darkness and thus do not physically see the light. That has a much more religious meaning really, but the comparison fits. Wow. I hope that made sense. I also hope I am the first one to have come up with this because I am really impressed with myself here. --jenny from ravenclaw, ready to be torn apart by the vicious listies ************************************* From cindysphynx at home.com Wed Dec 5 02:13:33 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (Cindy C.) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 02:13:33 -0000 Subject: House Elves: Enslaved by Mind? In-Reply-To: <9uju8t+ivcl@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ujvsd+kjsa@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30800 Jenny wrote: > What if part of the tragedy of the House Elf situation is that their > enslavement is in their minds? I mean, what if they have been utterly > convinced that serving witches and wizards is their lot in life, but > really, they can leave *whenver they want to*? What if there was no > spell at all that kept them in servitude to their masters? Wouldn't > that add a sad and complicated twist to the whole House Elf subplot? > I'll admit to being impressed if I'm also allowed to admit to being confused. :-) Let's say the house elves are basically just brainwashed and have bought into the whole "clothes = freedom" equation. There is no magic binding them to their masters, and there are no consequences to leaving. (Compare slavery in the U.S., where runaway slaves were in grave danger.) What do we have, then? Perhaps we don't really have slavery at all because the house elves are there voluntarily. Well, sort of. If the masters know that there is no magic binding the slave, and the masters know that the slave could leave if the master would just "suggest" it (in the form of clothes), does the master have the duty to liberate the house elves? In a different (and totally hypothetical ) context, imagine that I am working at a job that pays very little (or far less than I'm worth) because I believe I don't have any choice. Does my employer have a duty to educate me? I'm not sure. So I can't say whether Jenny's idea makes the house elf situation more sad or more acceptable. It certainly is thought-provoking, though. Cindy From jspotila at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 01:50:01 2001 From: jspotila at yahoo.com (jspotila at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 01:50:01 -0000 Subject: Harry's Coping Skills (long) Message-ID: <9ujug9+igc1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30801 I agree with the earlier posts on Harry's upbringing that Harry is remarkably well-adjusted given all the suffering and abuse he has endured. I recently read Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl, and was stuck by how much of his theories on suffering apply to Harry. I do not have a degree in psychology, nor have I read Frankl's other works, but I thought (hope!) you might be interested in my musings on Harry's coping skills. Frankl wrote Man's Search for Meaning in 1946, and used his own experiences as an inmate in several Nazi concentration camps to illustrate his theories of logotherapy, or meaning therapy. Basically, the logotherapist tries to help the patient find meaning in his/her suffering, and to use that meaning to find a way out of neuroses/depression. Frankl identifies three ways to find meaning in suffering: 1) create a work or do a deed; 2) experience something or encounter someone; 3) if the suffering cannot be removed, to bear it with dignity. Harry uses all of these methods to cope with the danger and pain in his life. 1) Do a Deed - Harry does a lot of this! There is the obvious - going after the stone to keep it from Voldemort; going after Ginny to save her from the basilisk; going after Padfoot/Sirius to save Ron, and then saving Buckbeak and Sirius; completing the tasks of the Tri- Wizards tournament and escaping from resurrected Voldemort. I would argue that in addition to providing lots of dramatic action, each of the incidents are also a response by Harry to sources or potential sources of pain and suffering. We also have examples such as Harry tormenting Dudley with fake incantations in CoS, demanding Uncle Vernon's signing of the Hogsmeade form (which doesn't happen b/c of Aunt Marge) and forcing Uncle Vernon to allow Harry to go to the Quidditch Cup. All in all, Harry is a very proactive person and is not afraid to take steps to improve his situation or alleviate suffering. 2) Encounter Someone - Harry relies on his friends a great deal. My favorite example is from SS, where he and Ron spend hours during Christmas vacation dreaming up ways to get Draco expelled. Harry relies on his tie to Ron to deal with the annoyance Draco causes. There are many other examples, such as his joy when Hagrid believes that he didn't put his name in the Goblet of Fire, or his communications with Sirius about the Tournament. Even after the trauma of witnessing Voldemort's rebirth, Harry liked it best when he could sit quietly with Ron and Hermione while they played chess and talked of other things. Despite the abuse he suffered at home, Harry is quite capable of forming deep and lasting relationships, even as he is slow to trust in some circumstances. All of this has been pointed out in other posts on this subject. 3) Suffering with Dignity - There is one source of suffering that Harry cannot change - the death of his parents. Again, I would argue that Harry bears this pain with dignity. We never see him complaining about his parents' death, although we know it pains him deeply. But Harry doesn't expect anyone to feel sorry for him, and doesn't seem to feel very sorry for himself either. Obviously, this is a grievous loss, and it clearly affects Harry. But he never tells a sob story or uses the loss of his parents to gain sympathy or advantage. For example, Rita Skeeter has to invent quotes from Harry about his parents (I think they are looking down on me . . . I cry about them at night) because he does not discuss the matter with her or anyone else. Frankl says, "it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life - daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct. Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answers to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual." I am not an expert, but I don't think that Harry is an unrealistic or idealized portrayal of an abused child. He is a highly unusual and remarkably mature child, but not an impossible one. Frankl stresses, as does JKR, that it is our choices that make us who we are. He writes, "in the final analysis it becomes clear that the sort of person the prisoner became was the result of an inner decision, and not the result of camp influences alone. Fundamentally, therefore, any man can, even under such circumstances, decide what shall become of him - mentally and spiritually. He may retain his human dignity even in a concentration camp. . . . It is this spiritual freedom - which cannot be taken away - that makes life meaningful and purposeful." Harry chooses over and over again to act/live with courage, honor and dignity. Even when he thinks his life is over, during his encounter with Aragog and during his fight with the embodied Voldemort, he chooses to die standing and fighting (and as we already know, is rescued in both events). GoF ends on a somber but also a serene note. As Hagrid says, "What's comin' will come, an' we'll meet it when it does." Harry's choices are inspirational, in my opinion, and are made even more so by the circumstances of his life. He is able to find the strength within himself to take responsibility for solving life's problems and fulfill the tasks set before him. Cheers, Jennie From ladjables at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 23:38:59 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 23:38:59 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter, the 10 commandments, and "witches" [very long] In-Reply-To: <3C0D58ED.200835F7@sun.com> Message-ID: <9ujmqj+nv76@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30802 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > They do celebrate Christmas, which I find interesting.) I quite enjoyed this analysis and would just like to add two random thoughts, the first being that magical folk celebrate Christmas because it has something to do with the magi(the 3 wise men) who visited Jesus on the night he was born in Bethlehem. > > > On Witches: > > -- > Most conservative Christians believe that the Bible contains many > specific condemnations of Witchcraft, and that these denunciations > apply (e.g. Exodus 22:18 - "Thou shalt not allow a > Witch to live.") And yet I always wondered at the convenience of having the Witch of Endor around for King Saul to consult. > > Ladjables, who is no Bible scholar! > > > From margdean at erols.com Wed Dec 5 03:18:51 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:18:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Snape as spy (again) References: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566E@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <3C0D921B.286A15BA@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30803 "Hillman, Lee" wrote: > Out of curiosity, could it be that the reason some people don't like this > alternative is because it means Dumbledore is playing God with Snape's life, > sending him into a situation where there was a VERY good chance he wouldn't > survive, and would die painfully to boot? Not at all, because if this is actually what they are doing, I'm quite sure it is with Snape's full consent. No, the only reason I don't like it is that it's predictable. He already DID that. I want to see Snape something new and unexpected. --Margaret Dean From djdwjt at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:23:25 2001 From: djdwjt at aol.com (djdwjt at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:23:25 -0000 Subject: Animagus In-Reply-To: <9ujnss+opbq@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uk3vd+jkbm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30804 > > >.................> > > > There might be one very good reason why the trio does not let Sirius > tutor them into becoming animagi (aside from the fact that Sirius is > going to die in OoP and isn't going to be tutoring anyone about > anything ). > > I suppose learning magic is like learning anything else. You can > only accomplish so much, and in some ways, it is a zero sum game. If > you spend three years learning to turn into an animal, there are > things you won't have the time to learn. Like DADA and charms. > Harry would be better served learning these things instead of trying > to turn into a millipede or something. > > Cindy Yes, Harry would be much better served by learning DADA and charms. But I would not be surprised if Hermione learned to become an animagus. She has shown an extraordinary interest in Transfiguration since the day she arrived at Hogwarts, it's a particular area of expertise for her, and she's willing to do the extra work required. Besides, she could get her tutoring from McGonagall, who has already shown a willingness to bend the rules to accommodate Hermione's appetite for learning. I think the odds are high she will try; then the only question remaining is whether she will insist on registering -- having an unregistered, unknown animagus around might be quite an asset in the fight against Voldemort. djd From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:31:21 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:31:21 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabber's first appearance Message-ID: <25.1f54f358.293eef09@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30805 In a message dated 12/4/2001 10:26:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com writes: > I don't know. If when Peter changed into a rat, he thought > completely like a rat, how would he remember to change to his human > form? We know from Sirius that one's mental state changes when you > assume animal form, but it is hard for me to believe that it would > completely change. It seems like you would have to retain some sort > of human conciousness. > We know Peter was aware of things around him as a rat because he had brains enough to get scared/sick and start going into hiding when he read that Black had escaped Azkaban. I just think he didn't want anyone to hurt Ron because then he'd have a hell of a time finding someone else to deal with him. -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From editor at texas.net Wed Dec 5 03:31:11 2001 From: editor at texas.net (Amanda Lewanski) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:31:11 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape as spy (Was: All things Snape (verrry long)) References: <9ujb5g+m79m@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0D94FE.C7BA6FD6@texas.net> No: HPFGUIDX 30806 mss4a at cstone.net wrote: > I don't think Snape can be a spy simply because Voldemort > would be able to tell if he were lying. Then how did he successfully spy before? I think this is just something Voldemort says, and he may actually believe it to be true, but personally I believe Voldemort can be lied to by a good liar. --Amanda [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:42:51 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:42:51 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mrs. Figg (WAS Harry's secret-keeper) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30807 In a message dated 12/4/2001 12:41:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, mss4a at cstone.net writes: > Personally I think Mrs. Figg is the secret-keeper Ok guys I need your help when do they mention Mrs. Figg having anything to do with everyone else (Wizards, etc) Am I just totally missing something. If someone could point it out I would really appreciate it! Thanks -step (who just got the collectors SS and is starting to read the books over) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From djdwjt at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:47:49 2001 From: djdwjt at aol.com (djdwjt at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:47:49 -0000 Subject: Ron Turning Evil In-Reply-To: <9uhqbi+oqkv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uk5d5+r4ms@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30808 > > > > I have a feeling that Neville mighty die, Ron turn evil over > > jealousy, and Hermione and Harry will live.....like someone said > > earlier history does repeat itself > > I have a gut feeling that Ron is going to turn bad. Ron is a very > jealous person, and he is becoming more so as he grows up. I think > Ron will be seduced by Lord Voldemort or Voldemort's agent and betray > his friends in exchange for power. Ron will gain much power from > turning evil. He will be more powerful than Harry and Hermione. > That explains why Ron's new wand is unusually long, much longer than > Harry's. However, Ron will ultimately redeem himself by sacrificing > his life to save Harry, Hermione, Ginny or/and someone else (Ron's > wand is made of willow, symbolizing sacrifice and cycle of life and > death; and his wand core is unicorn hair, suggesting that he doesn't > have too long to live.) IMHO, the evidence doesn't support Ron's turning evil. SS characterizes unicorns as innocent; there is no suggestion that all the innocent will die, merely that the innocent will be first. Thus, the unicorn hair in Ron's wand may suggest innocence more than shortness of life. Wand length seems to relate to the size of the owner as much as anything else. The women tend to have short wands and Hagrid's is the longest of anyone's, at 16 inches. So Ron's long wand suggests that he will be -- tall! The possibility of his sacrifice, however, is suggested both by the willow wand and his sacrifice in the chess game in SS. (I don't think he will die; however, my reasons for that have nothing to do with wands.) djd From djdwjt at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:54:39 2001 From: djdwjt at aol.com (djdwjt at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:54:39 -0000 Subject: Neville's Parents and Memory (WAS Who will Die) In-Reply-To: <9uinfa+es1s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uk5pv+tpsd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30809 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ktchong73 at y... wrote: > > > > I also have my own hypothesis about Neville's forgetfulness. > > Neville's grandmother brought him to visit his parents at the > mental > > hospital. Every visit must have been a painful experience for > > Neville, so Neville's grandmother, being overprotecting and wanting > > to relieve her grandson from the pain, cast a memory charm on > Neville > > after every hospital visit. That'd explain why Neville had memory > > problem, why he was so forgetful and dim-witted, and why Neville > > hadn't mentioned his parents to Hermione or any friend (because he > > didn't remember his parents or visiting them.) > > I have another, similar hypothesis. If Neville as a young child personally witnessed the attack on his parents (or perhaps somehow got caught in it), this may have caused him such distress that his grandmother put a powerful memory charm on him that affected his memory generally, a la Bertha Jorkins. As a result, he can't remember anything (that's why he's so bad at Potions) and he therefore lacks confidence. I think he has more innate wizarding talent than is evident, and that he's not really a near squib. After all, he had no trouble flying at his first lesson; his problem was control. djd From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 04:39:43 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:39:43 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizard secrecy, Snape, Percy's choices Message-ID: <24.1d74e96d.293eff0f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30810 In a message dated 12/4/2001 4:44:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, dfrankiswork at netscape.net writes: > > My personal objection to the go-back-as-spy theory is that it's so > obvious: JKR has just (in the context of the whole series) sprung on > us that he was a DE; he then gets a frightening task from Dumbledore > just after V has returned - it just feels so much like something JKR > wants us to think that it can't actually be true. I realise that > this type of argument can't really be used alongside the others - > either we argue within the framework of the Potterverse, or we argue > from the POV of literary probability. > Right well I was thinking the same thing. I doubt they'd be sending Snape back into V's clutches. From what we know Hagrid was on his way to bring the Giants to their side along with Maximme. Sirius was to summon the old crew. Maybe Snape was sent to either try to talk someone to their side (Dementors maybe) or brew some powerful potion that might be dangerous to make...but like you are all saying she's trying to make us think one thing just because it's the obvious thing to do but we know she doesn't always play that game. -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Jenniferlynn928 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 02:25:49 2001 From: Jenniferlynn928 at hotmail.com (Jennifer Lynn) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 21:25:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's secret-keeper Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30811 Another reason why it can't be the Fidelius Charm... >From what I understand about the Charm, both parties must be involved in casting the spell. Page 369 of PoA (American hardback)--Sirius says, "Lily and James only made you Secret-Keeper because I suggested it..." This suggests that the person being hidden has to pick his/her Keeper; someone else can't pick it for them. It also suggests that the Fidelius Charm can't be performed without both the protector and the protected knowing about it. Now this says to me that Harry can't have a Secret-Keeper, or he wouldn't have been so dumbfounded by the conversation in the Three Broomsticks in PoA. I would imagine that was the first he had heard of the Fidelius Charm. He can't have been hidden with it or else he would know about it, and know who his Secret-Keeper was. And don't you think he'd have told someone, maybe Sirius or Ron and Hermione, if he knew he was protected like that? There's no way the Dursleys could have been the ones with the Charm. They are so anti-magic there's no way they would have said yes, and from what I understand the Charm can't be performed without prior knowledge by both parties. I mean, the way Aunt Petunia talks about Lily in SS...calling her a freak...there's no way she would have consented to be a part of any wizarding, even if it was to protect Harry. They don't give a Hedwig's hoot about him anyway... Jennifer...who wants to be a Gryffindor but would probably be a Ravenclaw >From: "Barb" >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's secret-keeper (Was: Voldemort, Harry, >Gryffindor's Heir) >Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 22:12:56 -0000 > >--- In HPforGrownups at y..., mss4a at c... wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., ladjables at y... wrote: > > "But doesn't Voldemort know Harry is with his relatives? Or does > > the Fidelius Charm merely conceal location? Which leads to the > > next question, who is the secret-keeper? Does V know it's > > Dumbledore and that's why V says it's thanks to Dumbledore he > > can't get to Harry while he's at his relatives? Because he knows > > he will never get the information out of Dumbledore? I guess > > that was a few questions!" > > > > Personally I think Mrs. Figg is the secret-keeper. > >That's one possibility if the Fidelius Charm is indeed what is >protecting Harry at the Dursleys, rather than some older, deeper >magic having to do with blood ties (meaning that, for Harry's >safety, Petunia is the most important person in the household, >Dudley being a close second). The problem is, we don't know enough >about what the Fidelius Charm protects against, just how it works. > >This is from page 205 of the American hardback of PoA: > >"How does that work?" said Madam Rosmerta, breathless with >interest. Professor Flitwick cleared his throat. > >"An immensely complex spell," he said squeakily, "involving the >magical concealment of a secret inside a single, living soul. The >information is hidden inside the chosen person, or Secret-Keeper, >and is henceforth impossible to find--unless, of course the Secret- >Keeper chooses to divulge it. As long as the Secret-Keeper refused >to speak, You-Know-Who could search the village where Lily James >were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his >nose pressed against their sitting room window!" > >Flitwick does not say that the spell only keeps people of evil >intent from knowing where the protected parties are--so unless we >subsequently learn that this is indeed the type of protection >conferred by the charm, it is highly doubtful that Harry's >protection is from the Fidelius Charm and that Mrs. Figg or anyone >else is a Secret Keeper. Ron and the twins never would have been >able to rescue Harry using the Flying Ford Anglia if the Fidelius >Charm were in effect, and certainly Mr. Weasley could never have >received permission from the Ministry to temporarily add the >Dursleys' fireplace to the Floo network. > >Harry's protection must be a spell that specifically protects >against dark magic or someone with ill intent, and therefore he >cannot be under the protection of the Fidelius Charm, which does not >seem to distinguish between these two types of people, as far as we >know. > >--Barb > >Get Psyched Out! >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych >http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From dairyspice at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 03:37:36 2001 From: dairyspice at hotmail.com (Barb Dickson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:37:36 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 1460 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30812 >Do you sacrifice one very special young wizard to save hundreds or >thousands in the wizard world? Well, clearly, the solution is to not sacrifice the wizard OR endanger the rest of the world. I threaten my friends who propose letting the wizard die in order to save the world, and wind up jumping to my own death off a very large crane. That'll fix everything. Then my friends can resurrect me. Oh, oops, wrong topic. ____________________________________________________________ "You might have heard I run with a dangerous crowd We ain't too pretty we ain't too proud We might be laughing a bit too loud But that never hurt no one" -Billy Joel _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From devi1gurl537 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:52:06 2001 From: devi1gurl537 at aol.com (Lauryn) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:52:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper/Dumble-gleam/Ron-Evil In-Reply-To: <9ujjrn+cd26@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uk5l6+3a64@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30813 > Alas, Chelsea, it was mss4a who came up with Mrs. Figg, I guessed > Dumbledore! But I also think Barb's logic is correct(I hope I got > your name right myself), that it is ancient blood magic, "deeper > magic from the dawn of time", that is protecting Harry. The Fidelius > charm always confused me, because I thought it just meant > specifically someone(Voldemort)who was hunting down another person > couldn't find them, but other people could. I guess that doesn't > make sense. > Ladjables ^^I agree with Chelsea and Ladjables about Mrs. Figg being the secret- keeper, SHE was always the babysitter for harry when the dursleys went off on trips and left harry behind. also cats play some huge significance in the thick of things, and her house always reeked of cats. besides, dumbledore at tehe end of GoF mentioned the old crowd of "abrella frigg"... and then voldemort saying that dumbledork envoked an ancient magic to protect harry was probly the Fidelius Charm w/mrs. frigg as the secret-keeper hiding the location!!!!! now concerning Dumbledores Gleam.... i strongly disagree with the accusation that dumbledore is evil, he is not. he is the one wizard that voldemort fears and that is well known, he can not be evil!!!! that would make no sense. also, what would dumbledore have to gain out of being evil?? why would he be evil?? surely some wizard/witch would know or have some slight hint to it. and besides as someone mentioned, if dumbledore is a brillant as people believe him to be then why would he let down his guard to harry of all people to allow him to know or have suspisioun that he could be bad?????? then last... Ron dying or being evil... dude, ron is just jealous of harry because you know he is famous and always gets more attention then ron, and that is how it is in rons family with all those brothers of his to have to compete with people to have to try to get some attention. he is simply jealous, i know i am jealous of my friends about somethings, aren't all people jealous of others???? and puh-lease, ron turn evil?? no i highly doubt he would allow jealously to overcome him and turn on his best friend in the whole wide world who offers him some share of his fame even though they do get in fights. ron values the friendship he has with harry, i highly doubt that j.k. would allow that to happen. she did mention she was not making this a star wars layout and this kinda sounds like the anikan skywalker plot to me.... and i do not really think ron would die. maybe he might, who knows? but i do for sure believe that harry will not die!!!!!!!! thanxs guys, this was my first offical post, any questions/comments/debates plz send 'em out!!!!! ~Lauryn From halley.orthmeyer at home.com Wed Dec 5 04:00:03 2001 From: halley.orthmeyer at home.com (halley.orthmeyer at home.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 04:00:03 -0000 Subject: Look of Triumph/Gleam in D's Eye In-Reply-To: <9ujknc+cfgg@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uk643+86gv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30814 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., joeblackish at y... wrote: > I've been trying to catch up on my posts and the topic of Dumbledore's > gleam in the eye at the end of GoF seems to come up fairly often. I > personally think that this suggests Voldemort has made some sort of > mistake in using Harry's blood which we will find out about later. A > little more of the "ancient magic" we keep hearing about. > > Anyway, when this topic is being discussed, I have not so far noticed > anyone bringing up that Crouch Jr. also reacts oddly when he finds out > the Dark Lord took Harry's blood. I don't have a copy with me (I had > to return it to the library - I'd renewed it too many times), but if I > remember correctly, their conversation goes something like this. > > Crouch: And what did the Dark Lord take from you? > Harry: My blood. > Crouch then lets out his breath in a long, low hiss and then grabs > Harry's arm to look at the cut. > > I think that Crouch also having such a strange reaction to this > suggests that both he and Dumbledore must know something about why > Voldemort should not have done that. After all, it wouldn't be the > first time Voldemort had failed to consider fully what he was doing > and it coming back to bite hi This topic I actually find very interesting, since I have spent much time thinking about that line in the book "For a fleeting instant, Harry thought he saw a gleam of something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes" Many Many thoughts have come to my mind about that line, all of course seem very wild, until tonight, when reading this post. A connection that I haven't made before, though it was right in front of me, I just couldn't see it. Moody and Dumbledore must know one another very well, and since Dumbledore doesn't know Moody isn't Moody, but is in fact Crouch Jr, maybe it is possible that Dumbledore confinds things to Moody not only in this book, but purhaps in the past. Therefore Crouch knows something, however why doesn't he tell You Know Who? Leaves a person with much to think about..... -Halley : ) From philnel at ksu.edu Wed Dec 5 04:38:44 2001 From: philnel at ksu.edu (Phil Nel) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:38:44 -0600 Subject: Who Will Die? / 10 Commandments Message-ID: <3C14F8DD@webmail.ksu.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30815 Dear all: Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how old Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and later in the novel, too. If I had the book with me, I'd quote a passage. (I don't: the book's in my office.) At any rate, here's a hypothesis: Dumbledore dies in book 7. Harry, Lupin, Hermione, Ron, Black, et al. all must carry on his legacy. Remember Dumbledore's words in _Chamber of Secrets_ -- which I do happen to have at home -- "you will find that I will only truly have left this school when none here are loyal to me" (chapter 14, near the end). Very much enjoyed the 10 Commandments posting -- we just talked about the whole Christian issue in class yesterday (I'm teaching _Chamber of Secrets_ in my Children's Lit. class). If anyone's interested in a thoughtful conservative Christian's take on this issue, see Kimbra Wilder Gish's "Hunting Down Harry Potter: An Exploration of Religious Concerns about Children's Literature," _Horn Book_ May-June 2000, pp. 263-71. In the article, she outlines the objections conservative Christians have against the _Potter_ novels. She then counsels conservative Christians to read the books with their children. I am told that _What's a Christian to Do with Harry Potter?_ is a good book on the subject (as opposed some other books which we're not allowed to name on the list), but I haven't actually read the book myself. And, finally, Joshua Dyal asks, >different characters >give different reasons for the concealment of the wizarding world. >What do these reasons tell us about these characters? Interesting question: any takers? Best regards, Phil ------------------------- Philip Nel Assistant Professor Department of English Denison Hall Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 ------------------------- www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/ philnel at ksu.edu From mollypickle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 05:10:21 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 05:10:21 -0000 Subject: Other character perspectives (was Re: Damoclesian sword f... In-Reply-To: <7f.1e5c4d91.293ea794@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uka7t+3t6a@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30816 That would be way too cold. It's just not JK's style. Killing him off in the last paragraph? I just can't see it. Leaving a dead body and then finishing the book with nothing after it.... that would leave such a distaste in everybody's mouths. No way. -Molly Denton ********************************* Stickers to swap? Come on down to Sticker Swappin Station! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation ********************************* --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/4/2001 3:24:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, > gwynyth at d... writes: > > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2001 raolin1 at h... wrote: > > > GF changed that by having the first chapter told from Frank Bryce's > > > POV. Now that the seed has been sown... > > > > I sort of see that as a special case, because immediately after that first > > chapter, we see Harry waking up, having dreamed from those events, and > > apparently from that perspective. > > Yes, that's what I thought. It was still sort of in Harry's POV... > > But! That is no reason that Harry will stay alive. JKR could very well kill > him off in the last paragraph. > > > Calypso > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 05:40:36 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:40:36 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Other character perspectives (was Re: Damoclesian sword f... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30817 In a message dated 12/5/2001 12:12:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, mollypickle at hotmail.com writes: > That would be way too cold. It's just not JK's style. Killing him > off in the last paragraph? I just can't see it. Leaving a dead body > and then finishing the book with nothing after it.... that would > leave such a distaste in everybody's mouths. No way. > > -Molly Denton Many books do that! Finishing off with the last thought of the main charcter before his/her death. That type of thing usually leaves more of an impact too. It's not bad writing style, I see nothing that indicates why JKR *shouldn't* finish like that. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catlady at wicca.net Wed Dec 5 06:11:31 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (catlady_de_los_angeles) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 06:11:31 -0000 Subject: GoF End / Moral ? / HP v V / Peter v Neville / Amos / at the well Message-ID: <9ukdqk+q0e7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30818 Gwen/Lee wrote: > Leaving aside that I agree the Ministry will pin the murder of > Cedric on Crouch Jr., thus making it impractical for Snape to > impersonate him, It occurs to me that Fudge probably would rather that it did not become widely known that Barty Jr had escaped from Azkaban. Having two people escape from the escape-proof prison would not increase the populace's feeling of confidence. Maybe he will pin the murder of Cedric on the conveniently absent (dead and transfigured) Barty Sr, which creates the risk of prosecuting Percy as an accomplice, or even as the evil mastermind who manipulated poor old Barty who had gone senile. Maybe he will pin the murder of Cedric on the real Moody, justifying his paranoia. Jim Ferer wrote: > The kicker is that Voldemort's downfall (at least through his > blood-bond with Harry) will lead unavoidably to Harry's death. Do > you sacrifice one very special young wizard to save hundreds or > thousands in the wizard world? I would not be surprised if that IS what happens in book 7. Harry knowing accepts his own death as the cost to elminate Voldemort. Even if that was already done, in the Christ story. I also would not be surprised if the entirely wizarding world and all the magic people except Hermione were destroyed, and Hermione wrote it all down in a book. Even if that was already done, in the Mahabharata (spelling?), and the departure of the elves at the end of LOTR. Getting back to the topic, Dumbledore will explain the situation to Harry or make sure Harry finds out about it, and Harry will choose voluntarily to eliminate Voldemort despite the cost to himself. Some people would argue that an adult has a moral responsibility not to allow a child to make hiser own life and death decisions, but among other things that is irrelevant because Harry will be of legal adult age for wizards at that time. If the wizard who had the special bond with Voldemort were less heroic than Harry --- were, say, Gilderoy Lockhart --- I can see tricking himer into being sacrificed, involuntarily... I'm not saying that's moral, just that that's probably what I would do if I were in Dumbledore's position. Annalisa wrote: > There are already unusual coincidencidental similarities between > Harry and Voldemort -- the wands, being orphaned, very powerful, > being able to speak to snakes, etc. I wonder if Voldemort played > Quidditch. I think we've been told that Harry picked up Parselmouth and some of his power level from Voldemort's failed curse, along with his scar. Maybe what the Fawkes' feather wand recognized in Harry was the Tom Riddle "flavor" that had attracted the other Fawkes' feather wand to young Tom. In that case, I imagine that the woods, yew of death and holly of birth/rebirth/resurrection, were just a co-incidence; the boys would have fetched up with holly for Tom and yew for Harry if Tom had tried the holly instead of first trying the yew.... Anyway, about the Quidditch. I've also been wondering if Tom Riddle were a star Seeker in his student days, and if being a 'natural' at flying and Seeking were also things Harry had picked up from Voldemort. Harry loves Quidditch as the only thing he believes he's good at, his Cinderella glory, that makes him popular with the other kids... think how awful he would feel if he learned that it wasn't really HIS talent at all? Ladjables wrote: > Neville has never hidden behind Ron and Harry like Peter did with > Sirius and James, in fact singlehandedly attacked Crabbe and Goyle! We don't actually know that Peter really did hide behind Sirius and James; only that Sirius said he did while in a justified rage. We do know that Scabbers attacked Crabbe and Goyle and bit Goyle's finger, as recently discussed on this list. Cindy wrote: > Diggory is also quite snippy with a house elf, which was also > rather unnecessary. Not during the first reading, but eventually it occured to me that Arthur and Amos were playing 'good cop, bad cop' with Winky. In case someone doesn't know the term, 'good cop, bad cop' is an technique in which one interrogator questions the suspect in an aggressive and threatening way, then the other interrogator comes in and tells him not to be so rough and asks the suspect much the same questions in a kindly tone of voice, and the suspect is so relieved to have SOMEONE on his side that he Tells All. I'm thinking that Arthur and Amos may have worked as a team in some previous MoM job and gotten so used to playing 'good cop, bad cop' on suspects that they fell into it almost out of habit when there was Winky that needed questioning. Some police officers who are regular partner take turns which will be 'good cop', but Arthur probably always was 'good cop': it fits his style. But just because Amos is good at ACTING nasty doesn't mean that he would actually BE nasty to a House Elf whom he wasn't interogating. David wrote: > it must mean something - like the way people in the bible always > meet their wives by a well.) Forget all that Jungian stuff about wells symbolizing the female archetype. In that culture, the only time young women left the house with no chaperone except other young women was to draw water. Among people who don't have piped water, children and young women spend an awesome amount of time and walk an awesome total mileage each day, to go to the water source and draw water and carry it home for all cooking, bathing, washing, gardening purposes of water. From uptowngrl2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 05:26:59 2001 From: uptowngrl2 at aol.com (uptowngrl2 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 00:26:59 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Who Will Die? / 10 Commandments Message-ID: <16.166a79ff.293f0a23@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30819 Phil Nel wrote: > Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" > discussions? > Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how old Dumbledore is -- > when Harry's in his office (first time), and later in the novel, too. In my opinion, Dumbledore will definitely be dying soon (if not Book 5, then Book 6). He is old, and it's true that Harry has noticed this on many occasions. It seems that Professor Trelawney, the Divination teacher, has been set up as a medium, as shown in PoA when she makes the "second real prediction she's ever made," (concerning Lord Voldemort and how he will rise up to power because his servant will go to him). I believe Dumbledore will be able to speak to the trio - Harry, Ron, and Hermione - through Professor Trelawney, after he passes on. -Dana, lover of all things HP From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 05:57:19 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 05:57:19 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? / 10 Commandments In-Reply-To: <3C14F8DD@webmail.ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ukcvv+3djt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30820 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Phil Nel wrote: > Dear all: > > Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" > discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how > old Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and > later in the novel, too. If I had the book with me, I'd quote a > passage. (I don't: the book's in my office.) At any rate, here's > a hypothesis: Dumbledore dies in book 7. Harry, Lupin, Hermione, > Ron, Black, et al. all must carry on his legacy. Remember > Dumbledore's words in _Chamber of Secrets_ -- which I do happen to > have at home -- "you will find that I will only truly have left > this school when none here are loyal to me" (chapter 14, near the > end). Well, Dumbledore is ~150 years old, and sounds as if he looks about half that age. For all we know, he could live for another 50+ years. It's quite possible for a healthy muggle to live for 90-100 years, and if, as seems to be the case, Dumbledore ages more slowly than we do, he could live to be 200 or more. So personally, I think that if Dumbledore does die during the course of the next 3 books, it won't be from natural causes. From naycsh at rocketmail.com Wed Dec 5 07:13:00 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 07:13:00 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper/Dumble-gleam In-Reply-To: <9uk5l6+3a64@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ukhds+qii3@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30821 hello --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Lauryn" wrote: > > Alas, Chelsea, it was mss4a who came up with Mrs. Figg, I guessed > > Dumbledore! But I also think Barb's logic is correct(I hope I got > > your name right myself), that it is ancient blood magic, "deeper > > magic from the dawn of time", that is protecting Harry. The > Fidelius charm always confused me, because I thought it just meant > > specifically someone(Voldemort)who was hunting down another person couldn't find them, but other people could. I guess that doesn't make sense. > > Ladjables Hmm. Good point (argh, back to square one).. Anyway, did the Fidelius Charm apply to just the physical bodies James and Lily Potter, or did it apply to their house too? Because if it was the former, it would be rather perculiar for the Potter's friends to not find them (Potters) all of a sudden, but then again, if it was the latter, that would probably meant that the Potters would have to stay in their house indefinitely until Voldemort got off their backs (quite a feat since I doubt there was any sign of the end of Voldemort then). There was a previous post (in this group, I think) that had a snippet from the book explaining how the Charm worked, and then another part in the book mentioned something about Voldemort not managing to find the Potters even if he had his nose pressed against their window (should the Secret-Keeper not divulge), then I guess Voldemort could see the house, aye? Or perhaps he was just nosing around every inch of land (even he could see nothing there), trying his luck? Another question (I am rambling!), if a location is rendered unplottable, is it possible to deny the wizarding community from finding that location too? Or do the muggles just have it bad? > ^^I agree with Chelsea and Ladjables about Mrs. Figg being the secret- > keeper, SHE was always the babysitter for harry when the dursleys > went off on trips and left harry behind. also cats play some huge > significance in the thick of things, and her house always reeked of > cats. besides, dumbledore at tehe end of GoF mentioned the old crowd > of "abrella frigg"... and then voldemort saying that dumbledork > envoked an ancient magic to protect harry was probly the Fidelius > Charm w/mrs. frigg as the secret-keeper hiding the location!!!!! Heh, I just noticed that Mrs. Figgs always made Harry look at photographs of all the cats she'd ever owned.. maybe that is a hint orsomething? And the smell of cabbage.. Another thought, why would Mrs. Figgs let slip of the opportunity to look after Harry on Dudley's birthday? Frankly, a broken leg is not a very convincing excuse, at least not when there is SkeleGro.. could it be Harry's then-impending admission into Hogwarts that had her worrying that Harry might find her who/what she really was/is? > now concerning Dumbledores Gleam.... > > i strongly disagree with the accusation that dumbledore is evil, he > is not. he is the one wizard that voldemort fears and that is well > known, he can not be evil!!!! that would make no sense. also, what > would dumbledore have to gain out of being evil?? why would he be > evil?? surely some wizard/witch would know or have some slight hint > to it. and besides as someone mentioned, if dumbledore is a brillant > as people believe him to be then why would he let down his guard to > harry of all people to allow him to know or have suspisioun that he > could be bad?????? > > ~Lauryn I don't want a bad Dumbledore. :( siew. From naycsh at rocketmail.com Wed Dec 5 06:41:43 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 06:41:43 -0000 Subject: Harry as a ghost, Blood Baron (and Peeves) In-Reply-To: <9ujjkj+6tl5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ukfj7+dn6c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30822 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Liz" wrote: > This isn't a terribly important point, just something that occurred > to me. I don't think Harry would become a ghost if he were to die, > as was suggested above. JKR mentioned something about how the people > who become ghosts are people who were not very happy in life - or > something like that - and then said we'd find out more in later books > about why people become ghosts. This makes sense with Moaning > Myrtle, at the very least. So it seems unlikely that Harry would > become a ghost, because it would signify that his life ended on not > the best terms, which I don't think JKR would do. > > Also on the subject of ghosts: the Bloody Baron. (This may have > already been discussed recently and I missed it) I think it seem > likely that he will play some sort of role in one of the future > books. He's covered in blood, and he's the only person who can > control Peeves. Any thoughts on that? > > Liz If (indefinitely) JKR had meant what she said about the unhappy becoming ghosts when they died, then there must be a reason why Peeves became a poltergeist and not just an ordinary one (er, if there is a fundamental difference between the two, of course :]) and why Bloody Baron is the only ghost who can really control him. Should (merely guesswork) ghosts exist for the purpose to avenge (Moaning Myrtle) or to act as examples (sorta like a 'learn from history' lesson), would it be possible that both Peeves and Bloody Baron had died together and that Peeves was indebted to Bloody Baron? Heh, another rather ridiculous logic would be Peeves was Bloody Baron's house elf(!!).. but I should think not.. By the way, has anyone a theory to why the Bloody Baron is known as such, other than the fact that he is covered in blood? I read somewhere about a Red Baron and am wondering whether there should be some relationship between the two. OoP, a good one :) siew. From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 08:35:06 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 08:35:06 -0000 Subject: Neville as traitor Message-ID: <9ukm7q+huvn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30823 I have noticed in my several months of lurking that the Neville/Pettrigrew parellel comes up fairly often. First, I must say that I think Neville might be my favorite character hands down, and I expect much from him in books to come. However, has anyone ever theorized that Neville's unwillingness to betray his friends in the way Pettrigrew did (which I wholeheartedly believe he would never do) might be the source of the Dark Lord's ultimate downfall? Could perhaps Voldemort foolishly count too much on history repeating itself and try to seduce Neville onto his side as a source against the trio? I think the parallels between Neville and Peter are quite pronounced, and I could imagine Voldemort (or some spy at Hogwarts) noticing them too, and try to use him as a way to get to Harry. Neville, however, is not a coward like Pettigrew and will not hurt his friends, even if it means sacrificing his life (BTW - I enjoyed the wand woods discussion - has it ever been mentioned what Neville's wand is made of?). If this were to happen, it would make Dumbledore's "it is our choices that shape who we truly are" statement all the more pointed, which I feel is one of the most important themes in the From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 08:52:43 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 08:52:43 -0000 Subject: Marauders' houses/Ravenclaw in general Message-ID: <9ukn8r+7aci@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30824 I've been thinking about MWPP and I think I have a pseudo-theory, although I can't quite get it to work exactly. As there were four of them, and there are four houses, could it be possible that each of them represented a separate house? This would partly explain their ability to create the map, which I am assuming features all Houses common rooms (which could, BTW, explain Sirius's familiarity with the Gryffindor common room even if he wasn't in it). So here's what I'm going with so far - James - JRK has told us he was in Gryffindor; also, we could have guessed that much. Peter - okay, he obviously was not in Gryffindor, one because he was not brave enough to stand up to Voldemort, and two because he is excluded from there because James has taken that slot. He also, as far as I believe, could not have been in Hufflepuff, because he exhibited absolutely no loyalty to his trusted friends in the Voldemort situation, and I could not imagine a Hufflepuff betraying their friends in this way. So he was either in Ravenclaw or Slytherin. We know he was not in Ravenclaw, because it is made quite clear he was not particularly bright. James and Sirius had to coach him with the animagus bit. So that leaves Slytherin. Which makes sense. Although he is a coward, he has enough of a sense of ambition to try to make the best for himself out of any situation. Hence his turning over to Voldemort, not because he wanted to practice the dark arts, but as he says (when he was talking to Sirius and Remus in POA) Voldemort was taking over everywhere, and he thought there was simply no point in resisting. Clearly the man thinks foremost of what is best for himself, and what will benefit him the most. So now we're left with Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, and Sirius and Remus. Well, Remus has always struck me as the Hufflepuff type. He's good, hardworking, and loyal, despite his terrible lot in life. He does his best to get paid work, even though no one will trust him, because he does not want to sit around and feel sorry for himself. He works damn hard as the DADA teacher, and is even willing to take extra time to give Harry independent lessons. He is also, however, very selfless, and feels incredibly guilty for not telling Dumbledore about how his friends became animagi, and can only not tell him now because he is so humiliated at having betrayed his headmaster's trust. He is also not reluctant to leave whatsoever, signifying that he cares more for his students than himself. Although he desperately wants a job, he knows that he cannot run the risk of harming any of his students. Loyal, good, hardworking - sounds like a Hufflepuff to me. And then Sirius. I have the least evidence about him. He is obviously clever - he learned to be an animagus. And its the only one left. I guess he was able to escape from Azkaban, and has managed to stay in hiding for a long time. Both those work. Which brings me to another topic - does Ravenclaw seem extremely ill defined to anyone else? Forget the fact that we see practically no Ravenclaw characters - it just seems that all the other houses have a personality characteristic that distinguishes them - bravery, ambition, loyalty. But cleverness? You can easily be extremely clever and also be any of those things. I don't think that phrases it exactly properly, but does anyone see how cleverness seems more of an innate mental function while the others do seem to be more of something one chooses to value themselves? I wish I could get more of a grip on Ravenclaw. Right now, it honset From sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 5 08:54:04 2001 From: sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk (sofie_elisabeth) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 08:54:04 -0000 Subject: Animagus In-Reply-To: <9ujnss+opbq@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uknbc+l0il@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30825 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: (aside from the fact that Sirius is > going to die in OoP and isn't going to be tutoring anyone about > anything ). Do you know this for definite or are you just speculating? Is Sirius going to die? Okay breathe Sofie. Can I just say on behalf of all the Sirius fans: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Okay now i feel better. Please tell me, is this fact? From sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk Wed Dec 5 08:55:17 2001 From: sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk (sofie_elisabeth) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 08:55:17 -0000 Subject: Animagus In-Reply-To: <9ujnss+opbq@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ukndl+dm89@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30826 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Cindy C." wrote: (aside from the fact that Sirius is > going to die in OoP and isn't going to be tutoring anyone about > anything ). Do you know this for definite or are you just speculating? Is Sirius going to die? Okay breathe Sofie. Can I just say on behalf of all the Sirius fans: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Okay now i feel better. Please tell me, is this fact? From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 09:03:47 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 09:03:47 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum Message-ID: <9ukntj+mu0u@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30827 Okay, so this has constantly been bothering me since we first learned of Veritaserum. Why don't they just use it in their trials? Then they would know if people were acting under Imperius or not. I simply do not understand. Does anyone have any possible explanations of this, because to me it just seems like a terrible plot inconsiste From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 09:03:53 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 09:03:53 -0000 Subject: Scabber's first appearance In-Reply-To: <25.1f54f358.293eef09@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ukntp+o1dj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30828 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/4/2001 10:26:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, > beyondthelamppost at y... writes: > > > > I don't know. If when Peter changed into a rat, he thought > > completely like a rat, how would he remember to change to his human > > form? We know from Sirius that one's mental state changes when you > > assume animal form, but it is hard for me to believe that it would > > completely change. It seems like you would have to retain some sort > > of human conciousness. > > > > We know Peter was aware of things around him as a rat because he had brains > enough to get scared/sick and start going into hiding when he read that Black > had escaped Azkaban. I just think he didn't want anyone to hurt Ron because > then he'd have a hell of a time finding someone else to deal with him. > -step Just thought - well, you know how Ron is always complaining about how his pet is no good... well, Peter as Scrabbers might have gotten enough of that and decided to prove himself. (And to make sure Ron stays on his side!) From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 09:15:24 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 09:15:24 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum In-Reply-To: <9ukntj+mu0u@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ukojc+ni7c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30829 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "joeblackish" wrote: > Okay, so this has constantly been bothering me since we first learned > of Veritaserum. Why don't they just use it in their trials? Then > they would know if people were acting under Imperius or not. I simply > do not understand. Does anyone have any possible explanations of > this, because to me it just seems like a terrible plot inconsiste I have one: Fidelius Charm. You never know who's a Secret-Keeper. And I believe that breaking Fidelius is a serious crime (worth a long time in Azcaban). Snape also mentioned 'regulations' when the potion was introduced so well, I suppose there's one preventing such (It would be illegal of Snape to actually use it on Harry, I think) - and well, the trial was over 10 years ago. Maybe Veritaserum hadn't been invited yet? And um.. Would Veritaserum prevent choosing words carefully so that you give an impression other than the truth (but your *words* would still be true)? From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 09:46:25 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 09:46:25 -0000 Subject: Fudge/Percy going over to Dark Side Message-ID: <9ukqdi+3h4s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30830 I've seen a lot of people suggesting that either Fudge or Percy or both will be ending up on the dark side, and both of those theories really bother me. Personally, I don't think either of them could ever end up on the dark side. Fudge seems inherently good, though inept. He does want to hold on to his position, and while that is clearly a considerable concern of his, I don't see any evidence of him being desperate enough to hold onto it that he would join with Voldemort. Same with Percy. He's obsessed with rules, and wants to advance in the ministry, but is by no means evil. Rather, I think it would be more fitting for both of their characters, and also add more depth to the story, for both of them to commit themselves wholeheartedly to the party line that Voldemort has not returned. This presents several interesting conflicts. First, Percy vs. his family. His commitment to rules, order, and the ministry would fit in this situation, and also provide an interesting plot twist for the oh-so-perfect and happy and loving Weasly family. What happens when they are both devoted to good yet still split over what to do because one of them refuses to see what is actually happening? The same with Fudge. I find it much more effective for JKR to pinpoint the problems that can arise when one cares so much for one's own safety and comfort (which I think is far more important to Fudge than his position) that one is blind to serious problems they are facing. I think that the lesson that one can do bad (I don't want to say evil here) even while trying to fight for good is very fitting for these books and would add a new, interesting, and poignant element to JKR's already complex uni From oppen at cnsinternet.com Wed Dec 5 10:27:29 2001 From: oppen at cnsinternet.com (Eric Oppen) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:27:29 -0600 Subject: 'Harry Potter' to Be Released in Latin Message-ID: <012c01c17d77$722b38e0$dfc71bce@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 30831 I found this on the "Calontir" e-mail mailing list, and since several people have asked me for the URL: > (http://news.excite.com/news/ap/011203/16/ent-britain-latin-harry) > > > > Summary of News Article: 'Harry Potter' to Be Released in Latin > > LONDON (AP) Harrius Figulus will soon be seeking the Lapis Philosophi. All in immaculate Latin.... From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 11:37:31 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 11:37:31 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as a teacher In-Reply-To: <9ujbjs+75du@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ul0tr+pu26@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30832 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., dsslouisville at y... wrote: > > I know that we all love Hagrid and want him only the best, but do > you think it?s right from Dumbledore to let him teach Care of Magical > Creatures? > > I think this is an interesting question. Given the nature of this > position and the fact that Hagrid was effectively expelled (even if I > was for bogus and trumped-up charges) therefore prohibiting him from > using magic, isn't it dangerous to give a class of magical creatures > to someone who is not autorized to intervene magically if things get > out of control? Um... Hagrid's expelling was for a reason discovered in Book#2 was not his doing but Tom Riddle's. I suppose he got his wand back after that! (During Summer - Harry'd not know) > Do you suppose at sometime after Hargrid's expulsion > from Hogwarts that Dumbledore took it upon himself to finish Hagrids > training personallyk albeit in secret and "unofficially"? If he believed Hagrid innocent(as he was) he would have! That's a reason for Hagrid's reference and extreme loyalty for Dumbledore! Another might be Dumbledore saving Hagrid from Voldemort. And - it's also possible Hagrid's saved Dumbledore from a giant or two... From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 11:42:13 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:42:13 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Marauders' houses/Ravenclaw in general Message-ID: <6.204d6d0d.293f6215@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30833 In a message dated 12/5/2001 3:53:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, joeblackish at yahoo.com writes: > I've been thinking about MWPP and I think I have a pseudo-theory, > although I can't quite get it to work exactly. Well, one of the reasons your theory doesn't work is because we are told that Remus is a Gryffindor. Personally I believe that if they were such close friends that they even became animagi together that they were all in the same house. We see from current Hogwarts that while one is usually on friendy terms with the other houses they aren't really close friends. . Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From naycsh at rocketmail.com Wed Dec 5 11:56:05 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 11:56:05 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (WAS Harry's secret-keeper) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ul20l+p2oi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30834 Do you mean this part: Dumbledore: "Sirius, I need you to set off at once. You are to alert Remus Lupin, Arabelle Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd". It is Chapter 36: The Parting of The Ways in GoF. By the way, what do you all think about the old crowd? What does it do exactly? I am thinking that it was a group of wizards headed by Dumbledore to fight against Voldemort's 'reign'. A rather simplistic view, I suppose.. I can't wait to find out. Book5(fiveeee). siew. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/4/2001 12:41:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, > mss4a at c... writes: > > > > Personally I think Mrs. Figg is the secret-keeper > > Ok guys I need your help when do they mention Mrs. Figg having anything to do > with everyone else (Wizards, etc) Am I just totally missing something. If > someone could point it out I would really appreciate it! Thanks > -step (who just got the collectors SS and is starting to read the books over) From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 14:02:03 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:02:03 -0000 Subject: Dead Narrative Sources in lit In-Reply-To: <34.1ef23571.293ea61b@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ul9cr+t61s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30835 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > Actually, the first chapter of GoF *is* sort of in Harry's PoV...He dreamed > that entire scene. It is unclear as to how much is what Harry saw (dreamt) and > how much, if any, is a different perspective > > Calypso No, it was definately in Frank Bryce's POV. The whole device with Harry later dreaming it (and not evening knowing who the old man was) was just a convenient (and frankly, rather forced) conversion back to the standard Harry POV that we've seen previously. I still think that doing this was a transitional stage: it now makes sense for the POV to have other shifts as the books go on. Joshua Dyal From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 14:07:25 2001 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:07:25 -0000 Subject: Ron Turning Evil In-Reply-To: <9uk5d5+r4ms@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ul9mt+aaui@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30836 I agree that Ron may well turn bad - or at least be seduced by the dark side at some point, because he's one of the has an obvious weakness in his hate of being poor and wanting to do somethign greater than his brothers - be mroe powerful than them. But I don't think JKR would ever let us love a character so much - or allow a charater to be so close to Harry - if he was to end up bad. he will redeem himself and show himself to be on the right side. However, I do agree that someone has to be seduced by the dark side - and someone good has to be sacrificed - my bet is one of the Weasley twins - because the good do die. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., djdwjt at a... wrote: > > > > > > I have a feeling that Neville mighty die, Ron turn evil over > > > jealousy, and Hermione and Harry will live.....like someone said > > > earlier history does repeat itself > > > > I have a gut feeling that Ron is going to turn bad. Ron is a very > > jealous person, and he is becoming more so as he grows up. I think > > Ron will be seduced by Lord Voldemort or Voldemort's agent and > betray > > his friends in exchange for power. Ron will gain much power from > > turning evil. He will be more powerful than Harry and Hermione. > > That explains why Ron's new wand is unusually long, much longer > than > > Harry's. However, Ron will ultimately redeem himself by > sacrificing > > his life to save Harry, Hermione, Ginny or/and someone else (Ron's > > wand is made of willow, symbolizing sacrifice and cycle of life and > > death; and his wand core is unicorn hair, suggesting that he > doesn't > > have too long to live.) > > > IMHO, the evidence doesn't support Ron's turning evil. SS > characterizes unicorns as innocent; there is no suggestion that all > the innocent will die, merely that the innocent will be first. Thus, > the unicorn hair in Ron's wand may suggest innocence more than > shortness of life. Wand length seems to relate to the size of the > owner as much as anything else. The women tend to have short wands > and Hagrid's is the longest of anyone's, at 16 inches. So Ron's long > wand suggests that he will be -- tall! The possibility of his > sacrifice, however, is suggested both by the willow wand and his > sacrifice in the chess game in SS. (I don't think he will die; > however, my reasons for that have nothing to do with wands.) > > djd From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Wed Dec 5 14:10:17 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:10:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Snape's Task, Hard/Easy way, Harry's loss, Christmas Message-ID: <200112051410.JAA11093@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30837 David wrote: > I don't believe that Dumbledore has any interest in contacting the > Dementors. The idea that they are part of his task follows from the > things Dumbledore mentions to Fudge: ally with the giants; remove > Azkaban from the Dementors. When Fudge defaults (a possibility long > foreseen by Dumbledore), Hagrid gets the first, Snape gets whatever D > can salvage from the second: perhaps to investigate, in whatever way > possible, what is going on between the imprisoned DEs and the > Dementors. The Weasleys get the MOM as their task. Hm... if Snape was sent to Azkaban for *any* reason, that's more than enough justification to look pale, in my mind. > ...I can see the situation developing where > Percy will consider that he should take the hard decision to do > the 'right thing' and follow MOM policy, rather than the 'easy thing' > of going along with his parents' unofficial alliance with Dumbledore; Oh, good thought. I remember when I read Dumbledore's speech for the first time thinking, "Hm, that's an odd way of putting it. Sounds like he's pointing out that if you take the 'hard way' you'll end up dead like Cedric." I personally don't think that was one of the Headmaster's most eloquent moments. Jennie writes: > But he [Harry] never tells > a sob story or uses the loss of his parents to gain sympathy or > advantage. The closest he comes to this may be in PoA, when he says, "I'll never know what my parents wanted me to do, because thanks to Black, I haven't got any." Ladjables wrote: > I quite enjoyed this analysis and would just like to add two random > thoughts, the first being that magical folk celebrate Christmas > because it has something to do with the magi(the 3 wise men) who > visited Jesus on the night he was born in Bethlehem. Oh, cool connection. If I ever rewrite that post, I'll definitely include this, if I may. The subject line is full, so I guess it's time to end this post. Elizabeth From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 14:14:03 2001 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:14:03 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? / 10 Commandments In-Reply-To: <9ukcvv+3djt@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ula3b+9gd7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30838 Remember in SS - the reason why Voldemort didn't want to kill Lily Potter, but Harry - and Dumbledore said Harry was to young to know - I think Harry is the heir to Gryffindor - will take over the defence against the darker side - whether at 17 he'll be too young to do this without Dumbledore, i don't know - but I don't think we'll be allowed to think that dumbledore will live forever - he won't - and as there won't be any books beyons the seventh, maybe JKR will kill him off then. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "babelfisherperson" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Phil Nel wrote: > > Dear all: > > > > Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" > > discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how > > old Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and > > later in the novel, too. If I had the book with me, I'd quote a > > passage. (I don't: the book's in my office.) At any rate, here's > > a hypothesis: Dumbledore dies in book 7. Harry, Lupin, Hermione, > > Ron, Black, et al. all must carry on his legacy. Remember > > Dumbledore's words in _Chamber of Secrets_ -- which I do happen to > > have at home -- "you will find that I will only truly have left > > this school when none here are loyal to me" (chapter 14, near the > > end). > > Well, Dumbledore is ~150 years old, and sounds as if he looks about > half that age. For all we know, he could live for another 50+ years. > It's quite possible for a healthy muggle to live for 90-100 years, > and if, as seems to be the case, Dumbledore ages more slowly than we > do, he could live to be 200 or more. So personally, I think that if > Dumbledore does die during the course of the next 3 books, it won't > be from natural causes. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 14:23:21 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:23:21 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <24.1d750817.293eafb8@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ulakp+v2il@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30839 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > I wrote something about Generation Parallels on this list once....History > cannot repeat *exactly* or that wouldn't be a good story. I think that the > change in the gererations is Neville, who will prove to be a hero rather than > a betrayer > > Calypso I agree. Also, there really isn't a parallel to Lupin in the current group. And, for that matter, Neville has a long way to go before he's as "in on the game" as Pettigrew was with the former Marauders. And another also, the environment has changed completely. James, Sirius, et al lived in fairly innocent times -- there was no Voldemort rampaging through Hogwarts trying to kill them. Joshua Dyal From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Wed Dec 5 14:39:48 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:39:48 -0500 (EST) Subject: Dumbledore, the wizard world, Harry's Quidditch skill, veritaserum Message-ID: <200112051439.JAA11199@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30840 Phil wrote: > Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" > discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how old > Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and later > in the novel, too. I noticed this, too, and instantly started wondering how soon we're going to lose Dumbledore. I think it could even be before book 7. Probably not earlier than late book 6, though. But that would leave an interesting tension between McGonnagal and Snape as his deputies-- not just for control of Hogwarts, but for the overall battle against Voldemort. Dana suggested: > ...I believe Dumbledore will > be able to speak to the trio - Harry, Ron, and Hermione - through > Professor Trelawney, after he passes on. Hm. That would make a good use of Trelawney, who's a bit of an enigma at present. But I'm not sure there's a precedent for this. Rowling seems to feel that the dead don't come back, except as ghosts, and even then only if they were unhappy in life. Which reminds me: is there a way for ghosts to stop being ghosts? Maybe this will come up in OoP. Rowling has said that we'll find out more about ghosts. (Hm. A fanfic about a ghost therapist comes to mind... like I have time to be writing fanfics....) Catlady wrote: > ...I also would not > be surprised if the entirely wizarding world and all the magic > people except Hermione were destroyed... I've wondered myself if this is where JKR is headed. Partly because the wizard world is so flawed-- riddled with prejudice, wracked by factional infighting, and heavily dependent on slavery and oppression of other intelligent species-- is it really worth saving? But then I remember the Weasleys, and it's difficult to think of them all getting killed. Whatever flaws the wizard world has, it also produced the Weasleys. It would be a shame to have it all go away. I wonder if it will end up getting exposed though, and maybe magic getting weakened somehow. Possibly part of the reason the wizard world is secret is that magic is stronger that way, less diluted or something. > Harry loves Quidditch as the only thing he believes he's > good at, his Cinderella glory, that makes him popular with the other > kids... think how awful he would feel if he learned that it wasn't > really HIS talent at all? Ooh, nice twist of the knife. Even if Harry survives, this would make an interesting thing for him to have to give up. Actually, I'd go even further and ask, what if *all* Harry's wizard abilities come from Voldemort, without which he wouldn't have been a wizard at all? Except that that would have made him a Squib, and we know they're not common, even in "mixed blood" marriages. But it would make a pretty powerful alternate sacrifice (rather than just having him die defeating Voldemort). "Ok, Harry, if Voldemort dies you won't be a wizard any more. Ready?" finwitch wrote all the stuff I was going to write about veritaserum, plus this one: > And um.. Would Veritaserum prevent choosing words carefully so that > you give an impression other than the truth (but your *words* would > still be true)? Barty Crouch, Jr. seemed to have little choice over what he said. I think it works the way fictional "Truth Serum" is supposed to work (which isn't how it works in real life, but never mind). Someone especially devious and used to bending the truth might be able to hold out for a bit, but I suspect any extended questioning would get at the truth (as the questionee perceives it) fairly quickly. Elizabeth (Now I *really* need to get some work done! No more digests until after lunch!) From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 15:02:26 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 15:02:26 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, the wizard world, Harry's Quidditch skill, veritaserum In-Reply-To: <200112051439.JAA11199@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ulcu2+v5kj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30841 > > Actually, I'd go even further and ask, what if *all* Harry's wizard > abilities come from Voldemort, without which he wouldn't have been a > wizard at all? Except that that would have made him a Squib, and we > know they're not common, even in "mixed blood" marriages. But it would > make a pretty powerful alternate sacrifice (rather than just having him > die defeating Voldemort). "Ok, Harry, if Voldemort dies you won't be a > wizard any more. Ready?" > I love this post and this theory! If all of Harry skill comes from V. (or even just the parts of it that are noteworthy) than he may at some point have to sacrifice his powers to keep them out of the wrong hands. If he has no magic, neither does Voldemort, rendering him useless. So back to the Dursley's and the muggle world, but with a confidence you can only acheive by being instrumental in erradicating a threat to the entire wizarding world...thus Harry becomes a success in the "real" world which mostly regarded him as a freak before. This is a message that I can see JKR getting behind. Sort of depressing, although infinitely preferrable to any "Dallas-type-Bobby- Ewing-in-the-shower-dream-sequence" sort of shenanigans... Andrea (who should be making a pact not to post until after lunch as well, but is making no such promises...) From mollypickle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 15:21:26 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 15:21:26 -0000 Subject: Fudge/Percy going over to Dark Side In-Reply-To: <9ukqdi+3h4s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ule1m+u31n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30842 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "joeblackish" wrote: > I've seen a lot of people suggesting that either Fudge or Percy or > both will be ending up on the dark side, and both of those theories > really bother me. > > Personally, I don't think either of them could ever end up on the dark > side. Fudge seems inherently good, though inept. He does want to > hold on to his position, and while that is clearly a considerable > concern of his, I don't see any evidence of him being desperate enough > to hold onto it that he would join with Voldemort. Same with Percy. > He's obsessed with rules, and wants to advance in the ministry, but is > by no means evil. What you just said there brings to mind another literary character.... anyone read "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo? Sounds like Javert..... the "rules obsessed" policeman who is, in technicality, working for good, but really, when you come down to it, is the real force of evil in the book. Percy sounds like he might slip into those shoes just perfectly. -Molly Denton *************************** Stickers, all shapes and sizes http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stickerswappinstation *************************** From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 15:21:29 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 15:21:29 -0000 Subject: Harry as a ghost, Blood Baron (and Peeves) In-Reply-To: <9ukfj7+dn6c@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ule1p+pavr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30843 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "quasisnow" wrote: > If (indefinitely) JKR had meant what she said about the unhappy > becoming ghosts when they died, then there must be a reason why > Peeves became a poltergeist and not just an ordinary one (er, if > there is a fundamental difference between the two, of course :]) and > why Bloody Baron is the only ghost who can really control him. Should > (merely guesswork) ghosts exist for the purpose to avenge (Moaning > Myrtle) or to act as examples (sorta like a 'learn from history' > lesson), would it be possible that both Peeves and Bloody Baron had > died together and that Peeves was indebted to Bloody Baron? Heh, > another rather ridiculous logic would be Peeves was Bloody Baron's > house elf(!!).. but I should think not.. Peeves is not a proper ghost -- the Fat Friar says this where the students can overhear him right before Harry's sorting ceremony in SS. Also, someone here recently posted the definition of a poltergeist and reminded us all that a poltergeist (in folklore) is not the spirit of someone deceased, but rather an embodiment of sorts of strong emotions. I think the reason the Bloody Baron can control Peeves is that the Bloody Baron is a pretty scary guy, and probably a very forceful personality. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 16:08:09 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 16:08:09 -0000 Subject: Hard/Easy way, Harry's loss In-Reply-To: <200112051410.JAA11093@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ulgp9+79c4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30844 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > Oh, good thought. I remember when I read Dumbledore's speech for the first > time thinking, "Hm, that's an odd way of putting it. Sounds like he's > pointing out that if you take the 'hard way' you'll end up dead like > Cedric." I personally don't think that was one of the Headmaster's most > eloquent moments. LOL, I certainly never thought of that. It seemed pretty clear that the students were to remember what happened to Cedric as *motivation* when faced with the choice, not in a threatening way! > The closest he comes to this may be in PoA, when he says, "I'll never know > what my parents wanted me to do, because thanks to Black, I haven't got > any." That's not really the same thing, though. That's just to highlight his anger, not to create a sob story situation. Joshua Dyal From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 16:56:03 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:56:03 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders Message-ID: <12f.8b742c3.293faba3@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30845 In a message dated 12/5/2001 9:24:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, raolin1 at hotmail.com writes: > Also, there really isn't a parallel to Lupin in the current > group. I actually think Lupin and Hermione are *slightly* similar. Both have been ridiculed for being what they are (muggle-born in Hermione's case, werewolf in Lupin's) but seem to overcome this particular obstacle quite well. We also can see that Lupin is quite intelligent like Hermione, though we don't know if he was the most intelligent marauder. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From llaird at aberrant.org Wed Dec 5 17:07:53 2001 From: llaird at aberrant.org (Lorelei Laird) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:07:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying, Neville, etc In-Reply-To: <200112041547.KAA05647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30846 On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > But we've only seen three classic wand cores in Olivander's collection: > dragon heartstring, unicorn hair, or phoenix feather. I'm not sure we can > read too much into the meanings when there are so few choices. Those are good points. I dunno if we can rely too much on symbolism in wands to tell the future of the books -- it's a bit like Divination, eh? :} > I don't buy the idea of Ron turning evil, in the sense of going to > Voldemort's camp. He's jealous, but I can't see him being dumb enough to > side with Voldemort. What could Voldemort give him that he doesn't have? Money. And, as someone pointed out, the ability to outshine all his brothers at something. I don't buy jealousy of Harry as a motivation -- he'd have to be superhuman not to feel jealousy in that situation. But those aren't good enough motivations to go bad by themselves. Especially when you consider the enormous pressure Ron would feel from pretty much everyone in his life to be on the "good" side. His whole family plus Harry & Hermione plus the influence of the school are all working to keep him against Voldemort. Something big would have to happen to Ron's character in a later book to make him permanently evil. If I were writing it (and thank heavens I'm not -- big responsibility!), I think I might make Ron ultimately choose to stay good after being tempted, but not before letting Harry down through indecision at an important (non-climax) moment. On the subject of Neville, I think the revelation about his parents means we're gonna see more of him in OoP. He was largely backgrounded before, more an object in the plot than its subject, and IMO sort of a joke character, though the bit about "standing up to your friends" in PS/SS may have been meant to show that he has more depth than was shown. Harry has just discovered that he has something in common with Neville and will probably be looking at him with new eyes. I'd personally like N to become part of the plot rather than a subplot. I like the idea of Neville as victim of one too many forgetfulness charms, though that doesn't explain his clumsiness. Not that he couldn't be inherently clumsy. :} blah de blah de blah, Lorelei From breegenie at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 17:17:48 2001 From: breegenie at yahoo.com (breegenie) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:17:48 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <3C0D437B.7E58A9F8@sun.com> Message-ID: <9ulkrs+od39@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30847 Elizabeth Dalton wrote: I'm still pondering the significance of their (Snape & Harry) final scene together at the Leaving Feast, in which their eyes meet and Snape looks away first.... -- I took this scene to be the one moment where Snape is a little embarassed and worried. Harry now knows that Snape was a DE. Harry will struggle with this knowledge. How can he not? His parents were hunted by the DEs, Neville's parents were tortured, and Snape isn't very nice to Harry. It will be interesting to see HRH's reaction in OotP. This changes the whole dynamic of their relationship. Snape, who has been pretty nasty to Harry (maybe for good reasons...) has to trust Harry to not spread the news. The whole Hogwarts student body (and parents) won't react too favorably to a former DE Potions teacher. (I'm assuming that it isn't common knowledge). And Snape isn't exactly much use to Voldemort as a successful spy if the whole world knows what he is doing. Being beholden to Harry has to be an uncomfortable position for Snape to be in. Bree From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Wed Dec 5 17:41:41 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:41:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: Latin, the "old crowd", Javert Message-ID: <200112051741.MAA12252@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30848 Thanks to Eric for the link to the article describing the translation of PS/SS to Latin and Ancient Greek! But as the article notes, "Rowling, who studied classics at Exeter University before switching to French, has strewn classical references through the four Potter books, and many spells are spun in Latin." Soo... in the Ancient Greek version, they could leave the spells in Latin, I suppose (though it would be chronologically weird), but what are they going to do with the spells in the Latin version? It would be pretty weird to leave them as is. (And might not be correct Latin, either-- JKR did say that she did the research for their names on her own.) (I think they should translate them into ancient Greek... or maybe Aramaic. That is, except for those that are in other languages, like Hawiian. ;) "quasisnow" writes: > By the way, what do you all think about the old crowd? What does it > do exactly? I am thinking that it was a group of wizards headed by > Dumbledore to fight against Voldemort's 'reign'. A rather simplistic > view, I suppose.. I can't wait to find out. Book5(fiveeee). I assumed when I read GoF and heard the title for the next book that "the old crowd" and "the Order of the Phoenix" were the same, and, as noted above, a group of wizards who had fought Voldemort with Dumbledore in the past. I think it's significant that all the members of "the old crowd" that we know (Dumbledore, Sirius, Lupin) use Voldemort's name, not an elusive euphimism, the way everyone else does. Does anyone remember McGonnagal ever saying "you-know-who"? Moody also says Voldemort, though of course it's really Crouch. But I would expect the real Moody to do the same (assuming he says anything printable about Voldemort at all). I really liked Molly's comparison between Percy and Javert, but I think Barty Crouch, Sr., is a better fit. Percy still seems too small-minded to me, with his focus on leaky cauldrons, etc. (Meaning no disrespect toward the fine website of the same name, of course.) Elizabeth (Yes, it's after lunch here on the East Coast of the US... but now I should avoid reading any more digests until after work....) From llaird at aberrant.org Wed Dec 5 17:11:41 2001 From: llaird at aberrant.org (Lorelei Laird) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:11:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Elves: Enslaved by Mind? In-Reply-To: <9ujvsd+kjsa@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30849 I hate to make my second post to the list slightly off-topic, so if this gets into an abstract rights discussion, please email me privately. :} On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Cindy C. wrote: > What do we have, then? Perhaps we don't really have slavery at all > because the house elves are there voluntarily. Well, sort of. If > the masters know that there is no magic binding the slave, and the > masters know that the slave could leave if the master would > just "suggest" it (in the form of clothes), does the master have the > duty to liberate the house elves? In a different (and totally > hypothetical ) context, imagine that I am working at a job that > pays very little (or far less than I'm worth) because I believe I > don't have any choice. Does my employer have a duty to educate me? > I'm not sure. Of course your employer has a duty to educate you. Not legally, necessarily, but ethically. Otherwise, you are being exploited -- kept in ignorance on purpose so the employer can cheat you with your consent. There are probably all sorts of historical parallels to this. In any case, the situation Jenny proposes is slightly different in that it would be a wide-scale deception practiced by all of wizarding society, not just a few corrupt employers. It's also a little different because even if the master "suggests" that the slave leave by giving him/her clothes, the slave has been taught to abhor the idea of leaving -- which is psychological slavery, if you will. That said, I'd like to think that JKR's wizards (and people in general) aren't quite that evil. -L From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 17:48:06 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:48:06 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <12f.8b742c3.293faba3@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ulmkm+4d4i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30850 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > I actually think Lupin and Hermione are *slightly* similar. Both have been > ridiculed for being what they are (muggle-born in Hermione's case, werewolf > in Lupin's) but seem to overcome this particular obstacle quite well. We also > can see that Lupin is quite intelligent like Hermione, though we don't know > if he was the most intelligent marauder. > > Calypso Very slightly. Being Muggle-born seems to be quite common while being a werewolf is something that you have to keep absolutely hidden. Not only that, we don't know that Remus is *especially* intelligent. James Potter and Sirius Black are mentioned as two of the brightest students ever at Hogwarts, and Peter Pettigrew is mentioned as a somewhat poor wizard, but Lupin's scholastic achievements are completely unknown. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 17:49:17 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:49:17 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <12f.8b742c3.293faba3@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ulmmt+ohts@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30851 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > I actually think Lupin and Hermione are *slightly* similar. Both have been > ridiculed for being what they are (muggle-born in Hermione's case, werewolf > in Lupin's) but seem to overcome this particular obstacle quite well. We also > can see that Lupin is quite intelligent like Hermione, though we don't know > if he was the most intelligent marauder. > > Calypso Very slightly. Being Muggle-born seems to be quite common while being a werewolf is something that you have to keep absolutely hidden. Not only that, we don't know that Remus is *especially* intelligent. James Potter and Sirius Black are mentioned as two of the brightest students ever at Hogwarts, and Peter Pettigrew is mentioned as a somewhat poor wizard, but Lupin's scholastic achievements are completely unknown. Joshua Dyal From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 17:32:21 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:32:21 -0000 Subject: Damoclesian sword for whom? (Was: Longbottoms and "happy ever after"...) In-Reply-To: <9ui9bc+nl92@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulln5+gjht@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30852 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., laoisecronin at y... wrote: > But the stories are all told from Harrys point of view, if he died do > you think it would be strange to have the events afterwards from > anothers pov? I know that wouldn't be a good enough reason for JKR to > change who is going to die but we can all hope! Not to get to technical here, but the stories are actually semi- omniscient third person narratives. Which is to say that we have a voice that recounts the story from "above", i.e. not using any one character's voice, but does not let us in on all the details and often takes on the the emotions of the characters and/or goes along with the "gaps" in the characters knowledge. Because the books tend to be quite dialogue heavy, much of the story reads like theatre, in which we are the omniscient observer, with the added benefit of hearing the thoughts and dreams (selectively) of the characters. Perhaps the reason that we feel that the story is from Harry's point of view is that Rollings limits the internal observations almost entirely to Harry (much in the same way Shakespeare limits his soliloquays to the main characters); however, this should not be confused with a first person narrative. We are priviledged to things Harry is not (points in case, the Riddle House scene, the baby Harry delivery scene, etc.) Sorry to get English-teachery, but I think it is an important distinction. Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From kokobreen at juno.com Wed Dec 5 17:22:13 2001 From: kokobreen at juno.com (christine breen) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:22:13 +0800 Subject: scar link to voldemort Message-ID: <20011205172215.437.qmail@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30853 Joshua wrote: <> I had a sudden flash of insight. Harry's scar links him to Voldemort. Harry 'dreams' events that actually do take place with Voldemort. Could Voldemort have the same ability, 'dream' events that do take place with Harry? Would this cause Harry have to be excluded from fight the dark force war sessions because Voldemort could find out what they were planning? Christine -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://mymail.juno.com From breegenie at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 17:55:56 2001 From: breegenie at yahoo.com (breegenie) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:55:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's secret-keeper/Dumble-gleam In-Reply-To: <9ukhds+qii3@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uln3c+3g1n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30854 "quasisnow" wrote: > Another question (I am rambling!), if a location is rendered > unplottable, is it possible to deny the wizarding community from > finding that location too? Or do the muggles just have it bad? My impression is that something is Unplottable, no one can map it, Muggle or wizard. Reasons I got this impression: In GoF, Hermione points out that all the wizard schools are Unplottable. Karkaroff upbraids Krum for revealing too much about Durmstrang, which would reveal its secret location. There doesn't seem to be a clear idea of where Beauxbatons is located, either. (As the endless debate on HP4GU indicates!) In Fantastic Beasts (p. xix), whole islands or forests are unplottable to protect HUMANS from dangerous magical creatures. As wizards are as susceptible to dangerous creatures as Muggles (dragons, Quintapeds), this would be protection for them, too. Bree From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 18:04:05 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:04:05 -0000 Subject: Latin, the "old crowd", Javert In-Reply-To: <200112051741.MAA12252@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ulnil+4ouu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30855 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > Soo... in the Ancient Greek version, they could leave the spells in > Latin, I suppose (though it would be chronologically weird), but what > are they going to do with the spells in the Latin version? It would be > pretty weird to leave them as is. (And might not be correct Latin, > either-- JKR did say that she did the research for their names on her > own.) There's not really any language that is to Latin what Latin is to us. Maybe they could cast them in Proto-Indo-European? ;) > I assumed when I read GoF and heard the title for the next book that > "the old crowd" and "the Order of the Phoenix" were the same, and, as > noted above, a group of wizards who had fought Voldemort with > Dumbledore in the past. That seems to be common sentiment, but it's still just speculation. The Order of the Phoenix could just as easily be some entirely new organization that has never existed before now. And, for that matter (although it's unlikely) maybe it doesn't even have anything to do with Dumbledore himself. > I think it's significant that all the members of "the old crowd" that > we know (Dumbledore, Sirius, Lupin) use Voldemort's name, not an > elusive euphimism, the way everyone else does. Does anyone remember > McGonnagal ever saying "you-know-who"? Moody also says Voldemort, > though of course it's really Crouch. But I would expect the real Moody > to do the same (assuming he says anything printable about Voldemort at > all). Yes, that is interesting. I really noticed that with Sirius and Remus -- and it struck me as very odd at the time. Joshua Dyal From squireandknight at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 18:11:55 2001 From: squireandknight at yahoo.com (Becky) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:11:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulakp+v2il@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011205181155.60042.qmail@web20308.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30856 --- "raolin.rm" wrote: > I agree. Also, there really isn't a parallel to > Lupin in the current > group. > > Joshua Dyal > > Actually, I think Harry and Lupin are incredibly alike. I know everyone says Lupin's similar to Hermione, but they seem to have vastly different personalities. Harry on the other hand is quiet, has had a rather hard life, and is generally rather sensitive to other people's feelings (excluding the Yule Ball). I don't think we know enough about James to automatically put him as Harry's parallel. Just my thoughts on the whole Generational Parallel thing. Becky __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. http://shopping.yahoo.com From LenMachine at aol.com Wed Dec 5 18:04:43 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:04:43 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum In-Reply-To: <9ukntj+mu0u@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulnjr+7onp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30857 I've decided that when I have something to say, I ought to say it -- otherwise, Prof. Nel will just pull the rug out from under me ! (I've been waiting with Dumbledore's "I will truly have left Hogwarts" line for weeks now !) :-) --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "joeblackish" wrote: > Okay, so this has constantly been bothering me since we first learned > of Veritaserum. Why don't they just use it in their trials? Then > they would know if people were acting under Imperius or not. I simply > do not understand. Does anyone have any possible explanations of > this, because to me it just seems like a terrible plot inconsiste It doesn't seem inconsistent to me. I believe that they don't use Veritaserum for the same reasons the (American) police can't use sodium pentathol or lie detectors whenever they wish to elicit a confession -- because our system was intended to affirm and acknowledge the fundamental autonomy of each American citizen, even those suspected of the most heinous crimes. Again, this is an example of choosing "what is right" over "what is easy." Yes, it would be simpler for wizards to devise spells and potions and Sneakoscopes to detect criminals -- but a system based on "forcing" the truth out of others using Veritaserum cannot survive as long as the wizarding world has, in my opinion. Technology should not be used to subsume what might appear to be a creaky, medieval system; it does not override the fundamental principles upon which both the American and the British legal systems were founded. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Wed Dec 5 18:15:15 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:15:15 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death In-Reply-To: <16.166a79ff.293f0a23@aol.com> Message-ID: <9ulo7j+oej2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30858 Dana wrote: > In my opinion, Dumbledore will definitely be dying soon. It seems that Professor Trelawney, the Divination teacher, has > been set up as a medium. I believe Dumbledore will > be able to speak to the trio - Harry, Ron, and Hermione - through Professor > Trelawney, after he passes on. > This seems most un-Dumbledorelike. Surely, when he has organised his mind enough to embark on the next great adventure, he will do the thing properly - no ghost, and no attempting to control things from beyond the grave. He prefers even now to leave things as much as possible to decide, as we ahve often discussed. David, who now has a vision of the Bloody Baron sitting on Snoopy's kennel, wearing a scarf and goggles and saying 'Banditten at two o'clock! Die, Peeves, you Englischer scum - tch-tch-tch-tch-tch'. From breegenie at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 18:40:55 2001 From: breegenie at yahoo.com (breegenie) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:40:55 -0000 Subject: OotP title meaning In-Reply-To: <9ulnil+4ouu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulpnn+ohg5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30859 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton > wrote: > > Soo... in the Ancient Greek version, they could leave the spells in > > Latin, I suppose (though it would be chronologically weird), but > what > > are they going to do with the spells in the Latin version? It would > be > > pretty weird to leave them as is. (And might not be correct Latin, > > either-- JKR did say that she did the research for their names on > her > > own.) > > > There's not really any language that is to Latin what Latin is to > us. Maybe they could cast them in Proto-Indo-European? ;) > > > > > I assumed when I read GoF and heard the title for the next book > that > > "the old crowd" and "the Order of the Phoenix" were the same, and, > as > > noted above, a group of wizards who had fought Voldemort with > > Dumbledore in the past. > > > That seems to be common sentiment, but it's still just speculation. > The Order of the Phoenix could just as easily be some entirely new > organization that has never existed before now. And, for that matter > (although it's unlikely) maybe it doesn't even have anything to do > with Dumbledore himself. > > > > I think it's significant that all the members of "the old crowd" > that > > we know (Dumbledore, Sirius, Lupin) use Voldemort's name, not an > > elusive euphimism, the way everyone else does. Does anyone remember > > McGonnagal ever saying "you-know-who"? Moody also says Voldemort, > > though of course it's really Crouch. But I would expect the real > Moody > > to do the same (assuming he says anything printable about Voldemort > at > > all). > > > Yes, that is interesting. I really noticed that with Sirius and > Remus -- and it struck me as very odd at the time. > > Joshua Dyal From LenMachine at aol.com Wed Dec 5 18:34:33 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:34:33 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9ulakp+v2il@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulpbp+mqg9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30860 Calypso wrote: History cannot repeat *exactly* or that wouldn't be a good story. Then, Joshua Dyal wrote: > And another also, the environment has changed completely. James, > Sirius, et al lived in fairly innocent times -- there was no > Voldemort rampaging through Hogwarts trying to kill them. This brings to mind another parallel, which I haven't seen discussed yet -- the parallel between the Voldemort War I (VWI) and Voldemort War II (VWII). Obviously, we have not seen anything of VWII yet. But what does anyone think will happen ? What shape will their new strategy take ? (I mean the entire wizarding world, and not just Dumbledore and whatever he has going with Snape, "the old crowd," the giants, et al.) What has the wizarding world learned about LV and how to battle him and his DEs ? How will they learn to adjust to the change in his powers ? Before, the wizarding community was more or less unified against LV and his followers -- how will they cope now that there is an apparent split in opinion as to whether he has truly returned ? Personally, I think JKR has set the tone for an all-out war -- or, at the very least, a huge upheaval of wizard society. There are lots of suggestions that the relationship between wizards and elves, giants, dementors, maybe even goblins -- maybe even Muggles -- will change utterly during VWII. Our young heroes will realize, unlike the heroes and veterans of VWI, that LV stands against everything for which not only wizards stand, but everything for which humans, elves, giants -- all beings who cherish the sanctity of life -- stand. VWII will not be a battle restricted to the wizarding world. It will be a battle for all beings. Catlady said: > > ...I also would not > > be surprised if the entirely wizarding world and all the magic > > people except Hermione were destroyed... Then Elizabeth said: > I've wondered myself if this is where JKR is headed. Partly because the > wizard world is so flawed-- riddled with prejudice, wracked by > factional infighting, and heavily dependent on slavery and oppression > of other intelligent species-- is it really worth saving? Of course it's worth saving -- how could any modern *Muggle* civilization be left standing if they weren't worth preserving ? Let's face it, every society in every part of the world that has ever existed were/are flawed. They have had their prejudices, their infighting, their dependence on slavery and exploitation of other sentient beings. There is no Utopia. That doesn't mean we should head the way of the nihilists. No, I don't believe that destroying wizard society, as flawed as it may be, is JKR's aim. I do think that there are going to be some bad times ahead. The wizarding world is going to be turned upside down -- but not destroyed. Even wizards are redeemable, just as we Muggles are. It's worth saving, even if the entire Weasley family dies trying to prove it. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From ftah3 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 18:34:20 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:34:20 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, the wizard world, Harry's wizarding [was Quidditch] skill In-Reply-To: <200112051439.JAA11199@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ulpbc+i1fk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30861 Phil wrote: > > > Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" > > discussions? Several times in _Goblet of Fire_, Harry notices how old > > Dumbledore is -- when Harry's in his office (first time), and later > > in the novel, too. I think the deaths of main characters will be foreshadowed, and not just used for overwhelming dramatic (read: shock) effect. So far, I don't think Harry, Ron, Hermione, or Hagrid, at least, are in danger. My bets are on: - Dumbledore. Frequent mentions of his great age, and comments of his such as the one about death being just another adventure to the well-organized mind seem to not only imply that he accepts his own eventual death and is more than prepared for it, but also that the readers should possibly do the same. - Sirius. Death-wish guy. While in school, he tricks Snape into nearly getting himself killed ~ which, wow, talk about a way to get yourself in the HUGEST amount of trouble possible. Then, he laughs and lets himself be taken to Azkaban without even trying to tell anyone what Pettigrew has done ~ very accepting of a fate equal to, or even worse than, death; this could be explained by depression & guilt, but on the other hand, I would think that generally a person's survival instinct would kick in and at least *some* attempt would be made to defend oneself. Yet, no so for Sirius. Lastly, the fact that he takes off for Hogwarts to kill Pettigrew at great risk to himself, rather than trying simply to out Pettigrew and thus save himself; and then he later takes off for Hogwarts, again at great risk, when Harry's scar hurts him. That last is a wonderfully sentimental and heroic thing, however based on past actions, I'd say 'heroic' should be modified to 'tragic (i.e., doomed) hero' in Sirius's case. - Percy Weasly. He has shown a penchant for taking too seriously his reputation and rules and pragmatic duties, over things like family & the feelings of others. Also, he showed completely blind devotion to the doomed Crouch Sr., and I can see him doing much the same in regards the Ministry of Magic. I don't think he's in danger of going over to the 'dark side,' or of betraying his family for rules and reputation, so much as being another casualty in the Ministry's (or at least Fudge's) determination to ignore Voldemort's return. Anyhow, that's mho. But it's getting me down. :-P So moving on. Elizabeth wrote: > Catlady wrote: > > > ...I also would not > > be surprised if the entirely wizarding world and all the magic > > people except Hermione were destroyed... > > I've wondered myself if this is where JKR is headed. Partly because the > wizard world is so flawed-- riddled with prejudice, wracked by > factional infighting, and heavily dependent on slavery and oppression > of other intelligent species-- is it really worth saving? No way (imho). The wizarding world is only as flawed as the real (outside the books) world. If Rowling dismisses all of the wonder, beauty and possibility with which she has imbued the wizarding world as not worth saving simply because it is naturally flawed, than I think she would be also dismissing all of the goodness & potential of our own world, as well. I don't think she's that pessimistic, really. Elizabeth wrote: > Actually, I'd go even further and ask, what if *all* Harry's wizard > abilities come from Voldemort, without which he wouldn't have been a > wizard at all? Hrm. I thought I remembered that it's writ somewhere that a magical quill writes, in a book in Hogwarts, the names of magical children at the moment of their birth? If this is the case, I would think that Harry had some magical ability at birth, at least. It would be very interesting to discover what exactly he got from Voldemort, though, as you say! I expect he'd be willing to give up the Parselmouth gig; but what if he's so low on the talent scale without Voldemort's added power that he'd be about as capable as Neville currently is without it? That would certainly be a blow. Mahoney P.S. I started out signing my name as 'Dana,' but I see there is another Dana here. So I'll use 'Mahoney' from now on. From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Wed Dec 5 18:48:19 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:48:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore's gleam(long) In-Reply-To: <9uj5rh+38ic@eGroups.com> References: <9uj5rh+38ic@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <73168710492.20011205104819@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30862 Tuesday, December 04, 2001, 10:49:21 AM, ladjables at yahoo.com wrote: lyc> I know this theory has more holes lyc> than Swiss cheese, so please point them out to me. On the contrary -- Your theory seems to me as hole-less as Sharp Cheddar or Stilton. :) I would only add that it's not JKR's _modus operandi_ to throw a bombshell this big over multiple books. Quirrel turns out to be evil, but in the same book we meet him. Moody turns ou to be a Death Eater in disguise, but in the same book we meet him. JKR is not going to have Dumbledore be the kindly mentor, sage, grandfather figure, etc. for 4+ books and then have him be evil. If nothing else, she would anger too many readers. Personally I still like my idea... Forget if I gave it here or just on alt.fan.hp, but if I didn't: My idea is that Lily was an animagus too -- A unicorn, becuase she was someone pure and innocent, like a unicorn. So when V used Harry's blood, containing Lily's protection, it was like drinking unicorn blood -- "The blood of a unicorn will keep you alive, even if you are an inch from death, but at a terrible price. You have slain something pure and defenseless to save yourself, and you will have but a half-life, a cursed life..." V's double crime of killing the "pure" Lily and then using her love of Harry to save (or more accurately, regenerate) his own hide means he's doubly cursed. His days are numbered. Dumbledore knows this, and he feels triumphant, though he recognizes that there's a still a long haul ahead, hence his "old and weary" look a second after. -- Dave From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 19:00:24 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:00:24 EST Subject: Moderators Message-ID: <156.52c3dba.293fc8c8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30863 Hey guys, I couldn't find the e-mail to e-mail you guys directly (since im at work and can't do much so sorry about this) But my e-mails are getting cut off and I was wondering if it was something on my side or if it's doing it to everyone? They just cut out unexpectedly and it's obvious the person isn't done talking. Well thanks! -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From inviziblegirl at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 19:20:14 2001 From: inviziblegirl at hotmail.com (Amber ?) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:20:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] RE: Who Will Die? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30864 >From: Phil Nel > >Has anyone named Dumbledore as a candidate in the "Who Will Die?" >discussions? Most certainly there has been speculation about Dumbledore's possible death. For me, it's practically inescapable. And not just because of all the hints of Dumbledore being tired. McGonagall's line in PS/SS is a dead ringer: "I know you haven't," said Professor McGongagall, sounding half exasperated, half admiring. "But you're different. Everyone knows you're the only one You-Know - oh, all right, Voldemort, was frightened of." (SS, US edition, pg 11) That and the quote that Dumbledore is one of the most powerful wizards living practically seals his death sentence. Can you imagine the hysteria and panic if Dumbledore were to die? The only wizard that Voldemort is/was frightened of and he's *dead*? It makes sense, in my twisted mind, for JKR to get rid of Dumbledore. It ups the ante, as it were, and would force Harry (or someone if Harry decides to be reluctant) to take his place. If Dumbledore doesn't die in the next three books, I will be completely surprised. Dumbfounded, even. ~Amber ******** http://www.the-tabula-rasa.com "It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people." -- Neil Gaiman & Terry Pratchett, Good Omens _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From breegenie at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 18:51:34 2001 From: breegenie at yahoo.com (breegenie) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:51:34 -0000 Subject: OotP title meaning In-Reply-To: <9ulnil+4ouu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulqbm+n7ea@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30865 The message board seems to have eaten my actual comments, so let me try again: Elizabeth Dalton wrote: I assumed when I read GoF and heard the title for the next book that "the old crowd" and "the Order of the Phoenix" were the same, and, as noted above, a group of wizards who had fought Voldemort with Dumbledore in the past. > > Joshua Dyal wrote: The Order of the Phoenix could just as easily be some entirely new organization that has never existed before now. And, for that matter (although it's unlikely) maybe it doesn't even have anything to do with Dumbledore himself. -- Anyone think Order of the Phoenix might refer to Voldemorts followers? We associate the Phoenix with Dumbledore, but Voldemort DID rise again, and has a phoenix feather for a wand core. So: 1. Could be the new name for the DEs. Sounds a little fancier, although Death Eater had a more violent ring to it. (Does anyone know who calls them DEs, the wizarding community, or LV himself. He seems to call them followers) 2. Could be the name the DEs starting call themselves after LV's first fall. Can't exactly go around using DE after they aren't as powerful. 3. Could be the special name for the followers that were REALLY true to V, a special way for him to recognize them. In GoF he says he will reward them. Sort of the Order of Merlin, First Class for Death Eaters? 4. A little farfetched -- Could be the name for the MoM group that will deny V's return... HP titles seem to refer to something involving Voldemort that Harry will have to confront. If OotP refers to A Dumbledore led group, that bucks the trend...although you never know with JKR. Bree (who hope her post actually shows up!) From Joanne0012 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 19:25:35 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:25:35 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ulsbf+d7qr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30866 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amber ?" wrote: > If Dumbledore doesn't die in the next three books, I will be completely > surprised. Dumbfounded, even. I won't be. Richard Harris was pressured into signing a contract to do all 7 films. Robbie Coltrane, on the other hand, wasn't. From bethyellen at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 18:42:24 2001 From: bethyellen at hotmail.com (bethyellen2) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:42:24 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <20011205181155.60042.qmail@web20308.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ulpqg+ri2n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30867 I agree. Harry may look like James, but that doesn't really mean he *is* like James, but I can see why this is an automatic parrallel. It might just be me, but I do see Harry as being quite an insecure person. That's not saying James isn't, but I have never thought about it that way. Perhaps my mind has just been warped by fanfiction, and often James is this very loud, very self confident (but a great guy too) person. Or by Snape's own view of James, that suggests he found him very confident. Now there is evidence in Cannon to back this up to a certain extent, for example when Lupin says James would be dissappointed if Harry didn't find some secret passage out of the castle, but perhaps not more than that. Now, I guess what I'm trying to say (in a very longwinded way) is that I don't think we know enough about James or Lily, to say if Harry is like them in character. He might well be, but from the evidence we have, I think Harry does have some of Remus's qualities. Bethyellen --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Becky wrote: > > --- "raolin.rm" wrote: > > > I agree. Also, there really isn't a parallel to > > Lupin in the current > > group. > > > > Joshua Dyal > > > > > > Actually, I think Harry and Lupin are incredibly > alike. > I know everyone says Lupin's similar to Hermione, but > they seem to have vastly different personalities. > Harry on the other hand is quiet, has had a rather > hard life, > and is generally rather sensitive to other people's > feelings (excluding the Yule Ball). > > I don't think we know enough about James to > automatically put him as Harry's parallel. > > Just my thoughts on the whole Generational Parallel > thing. > > Becky > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping. > http://shopping.yahoo.com From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 19:39:44 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:39:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Latin, the "old crowd", Javert Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30868 In a message dated 12/5/2001 9:44:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM writes: > . Does anyone remember > McGonnagal ever saying "you-know-who"? Yup first Chapter in SS/PS and Dumbledore lectures her to say Voldermort. I would of thought McGonagall a stronger woman than that. Well after getting to know her she's really a stronger character than that I guess JKR just wanted to set up the mystery -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cindysphynx at home.com Wed Dec 5 18:30:29 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (flojocoe2001) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 18:30:29 -0000 Subject: scar link to voldemort In-Reply-To: <20011205172215.437.qmail@juno.com> Message-ID: <9ulp45+ji54@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30869 Christine wrote: > I had a sudden flash of insight. Harry's scar links him to Voldemort. > Harry 'dreams' events that actually do take place with Voldemort. Could > Voldemort have the same ability, 'dream' events that do take place > with Harry? Would this cause Harry have to be excluded from fight > the dark force war sessions because Voldemort could find out what > they were planning? > Hmmm. This is pretty interesting, actually. In the graveyard, Voldemort says he couldn't touch Harry at the Quiddich World Cup because Voldemort wasn't strong enough to attempt kidnap, and too many MoM wizards were around. But how does Voldemort know that Harry is going to the Quiddich World Cup at all? I think I recall that Bertha worked with Bagman in the department that supplied Arthur Weasley's tickets, so maybe Bertha knew. But it doesn't make much sense to me that Bertha knows that Arthur needs an extra ticket especially for Harry, that Harry will be allowed to attend. So maybe you're right that Voldemort gets "intelligence" through Harry's scar. It would be nice if we could think of more examples to support the idea, though. Maybe one potential example is the fact that Voldemort knows that Wormtail returned to him because of the incident in the Shrieking Shack, not out of loyalty. It seems unlikely that Wormtail would volunteer this information; he would probably be inclined to say he returned for all of the right reasons. I don't think this would lead Harry to be excluded from the fight with the dark forces, though. I don't think Harry and Dumbledore have any idea that Voldemort is gathering information in this way. Maybe they'll find out the hard way in OoP. Cindy C. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 19:43:37 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:43:37 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9ulpbp+mqg9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ultd9+mnd1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30870 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lenmachine" wrote: > Before, the wizarding community was more or less unified > against LV and his followers -- how will they cope now that there is > an apparent split in opinion as to whether he has truly returned ? I don't believe this is the case. Dumbledore mentioned at the end of GF that Voldemort had an almost unparalleled ability to encourage dissension and disunity. On what are you basing the assumption that the wizarding world was united unilaterally against him before? Joshua Dyal From cureluv88 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 17:50:24 2001 From: cureluv88 at hotmail.com (lizbot1981) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 17:50:24 -0000 Subject: Bloody Baron, Red Baron In-Reply-To: <9ukfj7+dn6c@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulmp0+9k9r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30871 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "quasisnow" wrote: > By the way, has anyone a theory to why the Bloody Baron is known as > such, other than the fact that he is covered in blood? I read > somewhere about a Red Baron and am wondering whether there should be > some relationship between the two. The red baron was a German fighter pilot in WW1, I believe. He took out ridiculous amounts of Allied planes, and no one could kill him (presumably he eventually died, I just mean that he was hard to hit). I am guessing that he doesn't have anything to do with the Bloody Baron. Someone (on some other message board) mentioned that they wondered if the blood on the robes of the bloody baron was silver not because he was a ghost, but because it was unicorn blood. Seems unlikely to me, but what does everyone else think? Liz From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 19:45:52 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:45:52 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulakp+v2il@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulthg+5kno@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30872 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > I agree. Also, there really isn't a parallel to Lupin in the > current group. And, for that matter, Neville has a long way to go > before he's as "in on the game" as Pettigrew was with the former > Marauders. > And another also, the environment has changed completely. James, > Sirius, et al lived in fairly innocent times -- there was no > Voldemort rampaging through Hogwarts trying to kill them. > > Joshua Dyal Well, during the Marauders' Hogwarts days, Voldemort was at the height of his power, so things weren't exactly considered "safe". It WAS different, though, since as far as we know Voldemort wasn't targetting them personally. From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 19:54:44 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:54:44 -0000 Subject: Who will Die, Neville In-Reply-To: <000001c17d10$02742780$e0e5f83e@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <9ulu24+m4s0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30873 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Simonen" wrote: > Remember, Ron is Harry?s best friend. When Harry?s alone with > Hermione, he certainly misses Ron, but in the Burrow Harry doesn?t > seem to miss Hermione very much. That's because Harry takes Hermione for granted. I think she's really his best friend, but he just doesn't realize it yet. She's the one who's always there for him when he needs her, and has never abandoned him over petty disagreements. Just because Ron is more "fun" doesn't make him a better friend. When Harry's staying at the Burrow with Ron, he doesn't miss Hermione that much because even when she's not there, she's still his friend. When he was alone with Hermione in book 4, Ron wasn't just absent, he was hostile to Harry. He didn't just miss having Ron about, he missed having Ron being his friend at all. The situations aren't really even remotely comprable. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 19:58:57 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:58:57 -0000 Subject: Bloody Baron, Red Baron In-Reply-To: <9ulmp0+9k9r@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulua1+nnlo@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30874 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lizbot1981" wrote: > The red baron was a German fighter pilot in WW1, I believe. He took > out ridiculous amounts of Allied planes, and no one could kill him > (presumably he eventually died, I just mean that he was hard to > hit). I am guessing that he doesn't have anything to do with the > Bloody Baron. His name was Manfred von Richthofen, and he took out 80 allied planes during the war. He was shot down on April 21 1918 by Roy Brown (a Canadian) and was given a hero's funeral by his enemies because he was such a legend. > Someone (on some other message board) mentioned that they wondered if > the blood on the robes of the bloody baron was silver not because he > was a ghost, but because it was unicorn blood. Seems unlikely to me, > but what does everyone else think? > > Liz I think that connections between the bloody baron and the red baron are not going to be very fruitful. I also believe that the blood is silvery because everything about ghosts is that color. Personally, I don't think the Bloody Baron is really important, and he's just in there for "color text" and flavor, really. Joshua Dyal From john at walton.vu Wed Dec 5 19:51:35 2001 From: john at walton.vu (John Walton) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:51:35 +0000 Subject: ADMIN: Yahoo is being weird; welcome to new members! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30875 Hi from your friendly, extra-soft, 100% Grade A Fancy Magical Moderator Team :) Just a quick note that Yahoo has implemented some bugs (oops, I mean Exciting New Features), which means that anyone posting via the website now has only their YahooID in the "From" section of messages. Grr to Yahoo, this is a horrible change and the Moderators are very grumpy about it. Yahoo has also been a bit screwy in general, it seems -- please bear with us and Yahoo, and if the group emails are not coming through properly, read them on the group site -- http://www.hpfgu.org.uk has links to all of the lists. A big HPFGU welcome to the new folks who have arrived -- the Main List has over 3200 members! This is very exciting! I'd just like to remind new folks that you're on our special introductory membership, which means that one of the Moderators and Elves takes the time to check over your post before it's sent out to the list. Since there are so many folks on the list, and because we have quite a few rules, it sometimes takes folks a while to adjust, so instead of making possibly embarrassing errors, we'll just take a quick look over it and either approve it or drop you a quick line asking you to make a quick change. After a brief period of this, we'll turn you into a bona fide full-fledged member of HPFGU :D Anyway, if you have any questions, feel free to email the Mods. We love getting mail! Send it to hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com. Cheers! --John, HPFGU Moderator With Rock #47 __________________________________ The HPforGrownups Moderator Team MagicalMods at yahoogroups.com Please read our Admin Files, particularly the VFAQ and Netiquette files! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/ From ladjables at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 19:46:06 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (ladjables) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 19:46:06 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <9ulsbf+d7qr@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulthu+i2p5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30876 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "joanne0012" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amber ?" wrote: > > If Dumbledore doesn't die in the next three books, I will be completely > > surprised. Dumbfounded, even. > > I won't be. Richard Harris was pressured into signing a contract to do all 7 > films. Robbie Coltrane, on the other hand, wasn't. Ha, ha, very clever! Except Richard Harris could be making appearances in flashback sequences, not necessarily from Harry's memory since scenes from previous movies could be used, but from anyone else's memory-McGonagall's, Snape's (if they're alive!), even if he died in say Book 6. I know, I'm reaching. I do think Hagrid will be among the first to die though, JKR has said he is her favourite character after HRH, that would be a death that would "half- crucify" her. I don't see Dumbledore expiring very soon simply because he has too much information to share with Harry about his parents and defeating Voldemort. Dumbledore will be around for a bit! Ladjables From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 20:03:45 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:03:45 -0000 Subject: Really looney theories Message-ID: <9uluj1+ofo9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30877 And not in the L.O.O.N. sense. Is there a catalog or FAQ of really weird theories out there anywhere? Ron and Eloise Midgen shippings? The Chudley Cannons (or the West Ham soccer team!) being instrumental in the fall of Voldemort? Neville is a male veela, or part kneazle or something else odd? H/H shippings based on quotes like "Harry's...in...love...with Hermione" GoF pages 3-407? Ron is the best of the group in bed because his wand is so long? Really, I'm looking for stuff that is really whacky, but *not* contradicted by anything. There oughtta be a section of the list FAQ for the really looney theories! Joshua Dyal From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 20:03:23 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:03:23 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? / 10 Commandments In-Reply-To: <9ula3b+9gd7@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uluib+du37@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30878 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "ffimiles" wrote: > Remember in SS - the reason why Voldemort didn't want to kill Lily > Potter, but Harry - and Dumbledore said Harry was to young to know - > I think Harry is the heir to Gryffindor - will take over the > defence against the darker side - whether at 17 he'll be too young > to do this without Dumbledore, i don't know - but I don't think > we'll be allowed to think that dumbledore will live forever - he > won't - and as there won't be any books beyons the seventh, maybe > JKR will kill him off then. I agree. Not that this hasn't surely been mentioned thousands of times before I even read the books, but I tend to think that when Dumbledore said in CoS that only a "true Gryffindor" could've pulled Godric's sword from the Sorting Hat, he meant it quite literally, that only someone of the Gryffindor bloodline could've done it. From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 19:42:06 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:42:06 EST Subject: HPforGrownups] Re: Fudge/Percy going over and comparism to Les Mis Message-ID: <7e.1f062c3e.293fd28f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30879 Molly Wrote........ What you just said there brings to mind another literary > character.... anyone read "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo? Sounds > like Javert..... the "rules obsessed" policeman who is, in > technicality, working for good, but really, when you come down to it, > is the real force of evil in the book. > > Percy sounds like he might slip into those shoes just perfectly ______________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ here are my 2 knuts > > I know of the story, but Javert is an obsessive man who wants all > of the power. Percey might want this, but he was in Gryffindor. He > has yet tom prove himself as a former Gryffindor. We have to wait > and see what happens to him. sometimes the least likely person will > wind up doing something amazing, it might be Percey, Bill or > Charlie. They are in the story for a reason, and they all will play > a part in the fight. From cindysphynx at home.com Wed Dec 5 20:08:47 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:08:47 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <9ulthu+i2p5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulusf+4ff2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30880 > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amber ?" wrote: > > > If Dumbledore doesn't die in the next three books, I will be > completely > > > surprised. Dumbfounded, even. > > Here's a horrid thought. Maybe JKR will kill off all of the Weasleys in one shot. Maybe the DEs will go there in the summer figuring that Harry is visiting there, and just wipe out the whole lot of them. Just a big Dark Mark floating over the Burrow, just like Arthur says they used to do. ::shiver:: I suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." Cindy (feeling a little bloodthirsty today) From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 20:05:07 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:05:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] OotP title meaning Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30881 In a message dated 12/5/2001 11:28:15 AM Pacific Standard Time, breegenie at yahoo.com writes: > HP titles seem to refer to something involving Voldemort that Harry > will have to confront. If OotP refers to A Dumbledore led group, that > bucks the trend...although you never know with JKR. > This isn't neccesarily true. As "Prisoner Of Azkaban" doesn't *directley* link to Voldermort. But I am also of the beleife that the OotP has something to do with Dumbledore. -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 20:12:23 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:12:23 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <9ulusf+4ff2@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulv37+htkb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30882 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > Here's a horrid thought. Maybe JKR will kill off all of the Weasleys > in one shot. Maybe the DEs will go there in the summer figuring that > Harry is visiting there, and just wipe out the whole lot of them. > Just a big Dark Mark floating over the Burrow, just like Arthur says > they used to do. ::shiver:: > > I suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe > she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands > of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." > > Cindy (feeling a little bloodthirsty today) Y'know, I had a similar thought -- that some (at least) of the Weasleys would die. Arthur, as the now tragic hero of the conflict, will recieve tons of public support and will be the new Minister of Magic! I doubt all of them would die, though. It seems as if the two oldest don't live at home, and Percy could get to that point too. And Ron may want to spend tons of time over the summer at Hermione's place (just to make sure she doesn't go to Bulgaria over the summer...) Joshua Dyal From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 20:17:13 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (jamie_0278) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:17:13 -0000 Subject: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover In-Reply-To: <3C0D437B.7E58A9F8@sun.com> Message-ID: <9ulvc9+4fhr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30883 Elizabeth wrote - "I'm still pondering the significance of their final scene together at the Leaving Feast, in which their eyes meet and Snape looks away first...." Bree wrote - "This changes the whole dynamic of their relationship. Snape, who has been pretty nasty to Harry (maybe for good reasons...) has to trust Harry to not spread the news." Sticking with the Snape-thought-Malfoy-had-left-his-old-ways theory, there may have been a way for this whole GoF situation to have been prevented had Snape realised that Lucius Malfoy was still in the thick of things. This would also cause Snape to look away. Or, maybe Snape actually pities Harry knowing Voldemort first-hand as well. What if Lucius was actually a "good guy." That would make for an intersting twist. ;o) - Jamie From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 20:17:31 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:17:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30884 In a message dated 12/5/2001 1:21:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, squireandknight at yahoo.com writes: > I don't think we know enough about James to > automatically put him as Harry's parallel. > I believe we get the Harry-James connection from Sirius, who comments that Harry is truly his father's son. That, to me, interprets to Harry definitely thinks like James. Another clue is the dislike Snape has for Harry...Perhaps because he is strongly reminded of James? Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 20:18:31 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:18:31 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <9ulusf+4ff2@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulven+jodq@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30885 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > Here's a horrid thought. Maybe JKR will kill off all of the Weasleys > in one shot. Maybe the DEs will go there in the summer figuring that > Harry is visiting there, and just wipe out the whole lot of them. > Just a big Dark Mark floating over the Burrow, just like Arthur says > they used to do. ::shiver:: > > I suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe > she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands > of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." > > Cindy (feeling a little bloodthirsty today) Y'know, I had a similar thought -- that some (at least) of the Weasleys would die. Arthur, as the now tragic hero of the conflict, will recieve tons of public support and will be the new Minister of Magic! I doubt all of them would die, though. It seems as if the two oldest don't live at home, and Percy could get to that point too. And Ron may want to spend tons of time over the summer at Hermione's place (just to make sure she doesn't go to Bulgaria over the summer...) Joshua Dyal From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 20:13:30 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:13:30 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulmmt+ohts@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ulv5a+lsro@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30886 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > Very slightly. Being Muggle-born seems to be quite common while > being a werewolf is something that you have to keep absolutely > hidden. Not only that, we don't know that Remus is *especially* > intelligent. James Potter and Sirius Black are mentioned as two of > the brightest students ever at Hogwarts, and Peter Pettigrew is > mentioned as a somewhat poor wizard, but Lupin's scholastic > achievements are completely unknown. > > Joshua Dyal Remus certainly seemed pretty smart when he was teaching the DADA class. Of course, James was Head Boy, meaning he was presumably the best student of the group. And Remus might've been made to seem smarter than he actually is just by being the first DADA teacher we've seen who's actually COMPETENT. Red XIV From idouright2 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 20:27:54 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:27:54 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who Will Die? Message-ID: <91.1487410d.293fdd4a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30887 In a message dated 12/5/2001 12:11:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, cindysphynx at home.com writes: > suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe > she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands > of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." > Actually I think that the Weasley's are protected under the Fidelus Charm. For one Molly says that a Muggle Post Man could never find the house even though they are in a normal Muggle Neighbourhood. The Burrow is somehow hidden. We've never seen anyone but Weasley's visit. And Molly is pretty paranoid so it wouldn't surprise me if the house is in some way hidden...but maybe I'm just horribly mistaken. Any other thoughts? -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cindysphynx at home.com Wed Dec 5 20:41:57 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:41:57 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <91.1487410d.293fdd4a@aol.com> Message-ID: <9um0ql+d3di@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30888 Step wrote: > Actually I think that the Weasley's are protected under the Fidelus Charm. > For one Molly says that a Muggle Post Man could never find the house even > though they are in a normal Muggle Neighbourhood. The Burrow is somehow > hidden. We've never seen anyone but Weasley's visit. Nah, I don't think the Burrow is hidden with something like the Fidelus Charm. Dumbledore refuses to let Harry stay there over the summer at the end of GoF, so it must not be all that well-protected from dark wizards. As for the Muggle Postman, muggles don't look properly, do they? :-) To add to my previous morbid post, it would be very compelling if the Weasleys were wiped out while the DEs were looking to find Harry. Imagine Harry's survivor guilt that his parents died trying to save him, and now more people have died in his place. Then again, the Weasley clock also has a position for "hospital," so maybe one or more Weasley will survive the attack, and we will finally get to visit -- St. Mungos! Cindy From philnel at ksu.edu Wed Dec 5 20:23:49 2001 From: philnel at ksu.edu (Philip Nel) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:23:49 -0600 Subject: Point of View References: <1007567548.1412.72177.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C0E8254.B38482FE@ksu.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30889 Dear all: I'd like to second Cornflower O'Shea's comments: Rowling may limit "internal observations almost entirely to Harry," but we do in fact get more than one point of view. So, then, Joshua Dyal's comments about chapter 1 of _Goblet of Fire_ are incorrect. Responding to Calypso, he writes: > > Actually, the first chapter of GoF *is* sort of in Harry's PoV...He > dreamed > > that entire scene. It is unclear as to how much is what Harry saw > (dreamt) and > > how much, if any, is a different perspective > > > > Calypso > > No, it was definately in Frank Bryce's POV. The whole device with > Harry later dreaming it (and not evening knowing who the old man was) > was just a convenient (and frankly, rather forced) conversion back to > the standard Harry POV that we've seen previously. I still think > that doing this was a transitional stage: it now makes sense for the > POV to have other shifts as the books go on. We first get the viewpoint of the villagers of Little Hangleton -- indeed if I had to name this viewpoint (which is itself several viewpoints), I would call it "local gossip." Just as Rumour in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part II introduces the theme of rumor and gossip into that play, so this opening chapter introduces the gossip theme in _Goblet of Fire_ (later developed by Rita Skeeter et al). The second section of this chapter does not begin from Frank's point of view, but it soon moves into a third-person voice that's clearly aligned with Frank Bryce. Complicating these points of view -- local gossip (and all the points of view contained therein) and Frank Bryce -- is the fact the chapter concludes with Harry waking from a dream. Inasmuch as Harry may be said to have dreamed some or all of the first chapter, the question, then, is how much of it did he dream? Harry remembers only the last part of it -- where Frank is overhearing Voldemort, Wormtail, and Nagini. Given this fact, perhaps Harry's dream is of only the final portion of the chapter. Were this to be true, then the point of view of chapter one would be (1) local gossip, (2) Frank Bryce, and (3) Frank Bryce mediated through Harry's dream. On the other hand, if Harry dreamed more of the first chapter (but simply cannot remember it), then I would need to revise the previous sentence. Given that Harry tends to be privy only to information that's directly connected to Lord Voldemort, I'm inclined to say that he only received the final part of the first chapter in his dream. A further question is: is it truly Harry's dream or does it really happen? If we're supposed to believe that it really happens, then Harry's dream is not a dream but a vision of actual events taking place. In this case, then perhaps we should omit the third point of view, listed above. Best, Phil -- Philip Nel Assistant Professor Department of English Denison Hall Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506-0701 U.S.A. ----------------------------------------- http://www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/ philnel at ksu.edu From clio at unicum.de Wed Dec 5 20:48:03 2001 From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:48:03 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566C@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <9um163+n9do@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30890 Hi to all, with all these newly sparked Snape discussions I think it would be an excellent opportunity to throw in something that I have pondered for a while. (Didn't find anything in the archive) It is about a scene in SS, when Harry complains about Snape to Hagrid, and Hagrid reacts in a, well, curious way. Quote Chapter 8, SS: Harry told Hagrid about Snape's lesson. Hagrid, like Ron, told Harry not to worry about it, that Snape liked hardly any of the students. "But he seemed to really hate me." "Rubbish!" said Hagrid. "Why should he?" Yet Harry couldn't help thinking that Hagrid didn't quite meet his eyes when he said that. "How's yer brother Charlie?" Hagrid asked Ron. "I liked him a lot -- great with animals." Harry wondered if Hagrid had changed the subject on purpose. [...] As Harry and Ron walked back to the castle for dinner, their pockets weighed down with rock cakes they'd been too polite to refuse, Harry thought that none of the lessons he'd had so far had given him as much to think about as tea with Hagrid. Had Hagrid collected that package just in time? Where was it now? And did Hagrid know something about Snape that he didn't want to tell Harry? end quote Interesting reaction from Hagrid, isn't it? Almost as if Hagrid is covering up for Snape. I mean Hagrid doesn't strike you as someone who usually is cautious with his opinions. He calls Filch an "old git", he makes clear that he doesn't like the Malfoys and he tells Harry to steer clear of the Slytherins. So why would he defend Snape? Even lie on his behalf (Snape does hate Harry, as far as we can assume from the books)? Why lie to Harry, whom Hagrid loves dearly? Hagrid probably even knows about Snape's shady DE past, and still he defends him. Why? It almost looks like Snape *has* a good reason to hate Harry. And Hagrid seems not only to know about it, but also to understand Snape. Note that Ddore also tolerates Snapes behaviour towards Harry. Let's assume that Hagrid really knows a reason why Snape might dislike Harry (other than being Harry). What does Hagrid know about Snape, and about Snapes relationship to James Potter for that matter? Hagrid was around at Hogwarts when Snape and MWPP where there as children. I don't think Hagrid would defend Snape if he would hate Harry only because he is still worked up about that Whomping-Willow-incident. I think there must be more to Snape's hate of Harry than just a schoolboy grudge of MWPP. After all he makes a truce with Sirius, who was responsible for that prank with the willow. And surely Hagrid wouldn't tolerate Snape being nasty to his protegee Harry because of a childish feud. So why on earth does he obviously lie to protect Snape? What do you think? Could there really be a reason for Snape to hate Harry? And what might that be? I can't come up with anything. Sorry, if this was discussed before. Clio, who usually lurks in the shade From meboriqua at aol.com Wed Dec 5 20:49:30 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (jennyandraul) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:49:30 -0000 Subject: Harry's Coping Skills (long) In-Reply-To: <9ujug9+igc1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um18q+oh84@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30891 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., jspotila at y... wrote: > Harry's choices are inspirational, in my opinion, and are made even > more so by the circumstances of his life. He is able to find the > strength within himself to take responsibility for solving life's > problems and fulfill the tasks set before him.> Oooh, I liked this! Of course, I like anything where Harry is praised, but that's just me :-). When I first picked up SS and Harry talked back to his bullying cousin (remember the "poor toilet might be sick" comment?), I thought, "Oh! He stands up for himself!" I was pleased with Harry right away for not being wimpy. I haven't been disappointed yet. --jenny from ravenclaw *************************************** From butagirl at aol.com Wed Dec 5 20:54:45 2001 From: butagirl at aol.com (butagirl at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:54:45 EST Subject: Quirdemort Message-ID: <16a.51ef43c.293fe395@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30892 Condy C wrote: <> I prefer Mooch! Sharon Brindle "Though I am butagirl at aol.com" From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Dec 5 21:02:12 2001 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:02:12 -0000 Subject: Aberforth (filk) Message-ID: <9um20k+9ndb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30893 ABERFORTH! A filk by Pippin To the tune of "Camelot" Dedicated to Mike Gray Scene: Hagrid's Hut Present: Hagrid, Dumbledore, Harry, Ron and Hermione. DUMBLEDORE Since taking office here at jolly Hogwarts A week has hardly passed without an owl Alleging some non-standard deviation Or other foul I do not barricade my office entrance Or lock the door and throw away the key For there's a man whose brav'ry and insouciance Inspires me Aberforth! Aberforth! They say he went a bit too far Good old Aberforth! Aberforth! In charming goats to be bizarre They printed nasty things about his habit (it's true I can't be sure that they were read) They hollered for his throat But could not get his goat His head held high, he sallied forth My brother, Aberforth! HARRY Aberforth! Aberforth! For other families have black sheep Aberforth! Aberforth! And skeletons in closets keep HAGRID My Dad'd be ashamed if he could see me He'd say don't be ashamed of what yeh are No longer will I sob I'll go and do me job HARRY, HERMIONE AND RON He won't be sulking here henceforth He'll think of Aberforth! From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:08:00 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (jamie_0278) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:08:00 -0000 Subject: Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying In-Reply-To: <9uj2fp+gmvr@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um2bg+j9he@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30894 lipglossusa wrote - "Ron may be prone to jealousy, but I don't think that necessarily mean he'll turn evil. He's only 14, after all. I think Ron has demonstrated himself to be a remarkably loyal friend to Harry and well up to the challenge of "fighting evil." Ron has seen for himself firsthand the building up of events over the past 4 four years of his friendship with Harry, and he probably understands Voldemort's threat better than Harry or Hermione. After all, he's the only one who comes from a wizarding family and has been brought up fearing Voldemort's name. Hoorah! I agree. Ron may struggle with jealousy but that does not make his destined for evil. He ends his "feud" with Harry after watching the first half and seeing that Harry is indeed endangered. This shows he cares more for Harry than the fact that Harry is richer or more talented. Maybe we should start a new club. Anyone up for S.A.T.Y.R. (Society Against a Traitorous Young Ron)??? - Jamie [I apologise if this is a repeat post. It did not go through the first time.] From virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:16:30 2001 From: virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com (virtualworldofhp) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:16:30 -0000 Subject: Marauders' houses/Ravenclaw in general In-Reply-To: <6.204d6d0d.293f6215@aol.com> Message-ID: <9um2re+n236@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30895 Calypso wrote: > Well, one of the reasons your theory doesn't work is because we are told that > Remus is a Gryffindor. WHERE? He roots for Harry in Quidditch Cup, thus rooting for Gryffindor. So? I take this as he wants the team of his good friend's son to win over nasty ol' Slytherin... Give me evidence. :-D -Megan From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 21:23:57 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:23:57 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Marauders' houses/Ravenclaw in general Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30896 In a message dated 12/5/2001 4:18:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, virtualworldofhp at yahoo.com writes: > Calypso wrote: > > Well, one of the reasons your theory doesn't work is because we are > told that > > Remus is a Gryffindor. > > WHERE? I could have sworn that Remus specifically says that Gryffindor is his old house. I really need to keep enough money out of my next paycheck to just *buy* the books so I can refer to them. I also don't buy into the whole marauders being in other houses theories because it seems that everytime there's supposedly support that so-and-so wasn't a Gryffindor we find out that they were. Take Hagrid or Lily for example. I can remember vasrious discussions on different message boards speculating that Lily was a Ravenclaw, and that Hagrid was a Hufflepuff. When JKR was asked in a chat she replied with something like "Gryffindor, naturally!". I will assume they were all Gryffindors until JKR states otherwise Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:29:34 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:29:34 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum In-Reply-To: <9ulnjr+7onp@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um3ju+mths@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30897 > It doesn't seem inconsistent to me. I believe that they don't use > Veritaserum for the same reasons the (American) police can't use > sodium pentathol or lie detectors whenever they wish to elicit a > confession -- because our system was intended to affirm and > acknowledge the fundamental autonomy of each American citizen, even > those suspected of the most heinous crimes. Actually, that is not why those are not used to procure evidence. Both lie detectors and sodium pentathol are inadmissable in court because of their relatively low accuracy rates. It has nothing to do with the court system or police being concerned with a citizen's autonomy. Lie detectors are terribly unreliable, and thus to use one would at the same time provide no definite new information and also offer a false sense of security. If we had infallible truth detectors, I believe that we most definitely would being using them in our courts. The wizarding world does have this in the form of Veritaserum. Also, I really don't see the Ministry respecting their citizens in the way you are suggesting. If they are willing to authorize use of unforgivable curses on suspected Death Eaters, send people to Azkaban for life with no trial, hold trials for certain people only as a show, etc, it seems to me completely in character for them to use Veritaserum to get the truth out of suspected Death Eaters in t From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 20:53:32 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 20:53:32 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape In-Reply-To: <9um163+n9do@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um1gc+ohai@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30898 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "clio44a" wrote: > What do you think? Could there really be a reason for Snape to > hate Harry? And what might that be? I can't come up with anything. > Sorry, if this was discussed before. > > Clio, > who usually lurks in the shade In a word, no. Snape hated Harry before he ever met him. Thus, Snape clearly has no good reason for his hatred. Perhaps he had a legitimate reason for hating James Potter, but assuming the son would be just like the father & thus also worthy of his hatred shows that Snape is stupid, petty git. Red XIV From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 21:34:32 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:34:32 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <91.1487410d.293fdd4a@aol.com> Message-ID: <9um3t8+oh94@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30899 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > Actually I think that the Weasley's are protected under the Fidelus Charm. > For one Molly says that a Muggle Post Man could never find the house even > though they are in a normal Muggle Neighbourhood. The Burrow is somehow > hidden. We've never seen anyone but Weasley's visit. And Molly is pretty > paranoid so it wouldn't surprise me if the house is in some way hidden...but > maybe I'm just horribly mistaken. Any other thoughts? > -step Yes! There's no indication that the Weasley's live in a common Muggle neighborhood -- in fact, it appears they live out in the country, from the description of their walk to Stoatshead Hill in GoF. Also, Hermione seemed to find it easily enough, Amos Diggory appears in the fire, Arthur gets messages from all over the place, and finally Arthur tells Amos Diggory where he lives! All in all, this is hardly the behavior of someone hidden by the Fidelius Charm. Factor that in with the idea that there is no reason we can possibly entertain that would explain *why* they Weasleys would have done such a complicated charm when there is no threat to them (that we know of) and I'd say yes: you are horribly mistaken! :- ) Joshua Dyal From ladjables at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:06:12 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (Ama Byer) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:06:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulv5a+lsro@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011205210612.23602.qmail@web20406.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30900 --- babelfisherperson wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" > wrote: > > Being Muggle-born seems to be > quite common while being a werewolf is something >that you have to keep absolutely hidden. Not only >that, we don't know that Remusis *especially* >intelligent. > > Joshua Dyal > > Remus certainly seemed pretty smart when he was > teaching the DADA > class. Of course, James was Head Boy, meaning he was > presumably the > best student of the group. Red XIV I'd just like to mention 2 things. Remus being a werewolf may have made him extremely introverted, even if he had extraordinary ability he may have suppressed it to avoid getting any sort of attention. Bright but but troubled kids do it all the time. Secondly, I went to a school similar to Hogwarts(!) never mind the ghosts considered it beneath them to be house mascots. However, the head boy/girl was not necessarily the best student in the class, but the well-rounded one, who pulled satisfactory grades, was active in the student council, a good sportsperson, showed a sense of responisibility and so on and so on. Therefore James and Sirius were outstanding students but James' maturity, as evinced by his reaction to Sirius' foolish prank may have made him a better choice for Head Boy, even if he weren't brilliant. Clear as mud? Good. Ladjables __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From dsslouisville at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:39:37 2001 From: dsslouisville at yahoo.com (dsslouisville) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:39:37 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape In-Reply-To: <9um1gc+ohai@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um46p+tfib@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30901 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "babelfisherperson" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "clio44a" wrote: > > What do you think? Could there really be a reason for Snape to > > hate Harry? And what might that be? I can't come up with anything. > > Sorry, if this was discussed before. > > > > Clio, > > who usually lurks in the shade Is it possible that Snape's hatred for Harry is sprung from his fear of Harry??? I mean, he did virtually single-handedly destroy a v. powerful dark wizard...Perhaps his loathing is nothing more than fear mixed with an uncertaintly of the scope of Harry's powers. Andrea, who was actually sorted into Slytherin...(3 TIMES on Warner Bros. website but is not proud of it!!) From raolin1 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 21:41:26 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:41:26 -0000 Subject: Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <20011205210612.23602.qmail@web20406.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9um4a6+3imi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30902 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Ama Byer wrote: > Secondly, I went to a school similar to Hogwarts(!) > never mind the ghosts considered it beneath them to be > house mascots. However, the head boy/girl was not > necessarily the best student in the class, but the > well-rounded one, who pulled satisfactory grades, was > active in the student council, a good sportsperson, > showed a sense of responisibility and so on and so on. > Therefore James and Sirius were outstanding students > but James' maturity, as evinced by his reaction to > Sirius' foolish prank may have made him a better > choice for Head Boy, even if he weren't brilliant. > Clear as mud? Good. > > Ladjables Yes, clear, but unfortunately incorrect. Several of the professors have mentioned that James was one of the most brilliant wizards of his time, and Sirius as well (Dumbledore does at one point, and McGonagall/Flit do during the "Butterbeer scene" in PA.) The absence of any such credit being given to Remus isn't necessarily damning, but it is somewhat telling. Joshua Dyal From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:43:51 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:43:51 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9ulpbp+mqg9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um4en+7mpv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30903 > Calypso wrote: > > > History cannot repeat *exactly* or that wouldn't be a good story. > > > Then, Joshua Dyal wrote: > > > > And another also, the environment has changed completely. James, > > Sirius, et al lived in fairly innocent times -- there was no > > Voldemort rampaging through Hogwarts trying to kill them. > > Actually... considering that Voldemort was in his ascendancy for ten years before he took on the Potters, wouldn't that dictate that the Marauders were *not* in school during "fairly innocent times," for the most part? I believe the common interpretation is that Harry was born when the Potters were just twenty years old (having graduated in 1978), and we know factually that his parents were killed just over a year later. That would of course make *all* of the Marauders' school years coincide with Voldemort's increasingly harsh power period. From Calypso8604 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 21:46:55 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:46:55 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Mara... Message-ID: <9c.1776dad1.293fefcf@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30904 In a message dated 12/5/2001 4:44:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, raolin1 at hotmail.com writes: > Yes, clear, but unfortunately incorrect. Several of the professors > have mentioned that James was one of the most brilliant wizards of > his time, and Sirius as well (Dumbledore does at one point, and > McGonagall/Flit do during the "Butterbeer scene" in PA.) The absence > of any such credit being given to Remus isn't necessarily damning, > but it is somewhat telling. > > Joshua Dyal It's also been stated that several of the professors were wary of Lupin because of his werewolf status. This creates an unfair bias against him. Perhaps they simply never mentioned Remus' abilities because they were reluctant to admit it. Not saying they are all narrow-minded but it's something to keep in mind Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From LenMachine at aol.com Wed Dec 5 21:46:55 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:46:55 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9ultd9+mnd1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um4kf+84tn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30905 I wrote: > > Before, the wizarding community was more or less unified > > against LV and his followers -- how will they cope now that there > is > > an apparent split in opinion as to whether he has truly returned ? Then Joshua Dyal wrote: > I don't believe this is the case. Dumbledore mentioned at the end of > GF that Voldemort had an almost unparalleled ability to encourage > dissension and disunity. On what are you basing the assumption that > the wizarding world was united unilaterally against him before? On the fact that on the day Voldemort was defeated, nearly every witch and wizard in Britain celebrated -- they were ecstatic enough to let their guards slip, for just one moment. Why ? Because, despite any disagreements on policy or on strategy, most wizards wanted to see Voldemort defeated, even if they didn't know how it was ever going to happen. Whatever a wizard believed -- whether they preferred fair trials for all suspected DEs or just wanted to ship every single suspect up the river to Azkaban without a hearing -- they knew they could always be a likely target for Voldemort. There may have been internal strife when it came to deciding how to deal with things, but everyone could agree: Voldemort had to be vanquished. He existed. He was a real threat. We've heard of the many horrible things he did to both Muggles and wizards alike. Whether or not one wanted to face the fact that someone like Voldemort could exist, these events were indeed happening and the danger to the wizarding world was palpable. (To give a real life example: This country is engaging in fierce debates about the war against terrorism. There are disagreements over the legitimacy of our being in Afghanistan, the new federal "anti- terrorist" laws, over whether bin Laden and his associates should be brought back to the United States to stand trial, etc. But despite the many positions on how the U.S. should act, I think a majority of Americans would prefer the same result: to end the threat of terrorism in the world.) As of the present time in the wizarding world (i.e. just after the events of GoF), many wizards will want to blind themselves to the fact that such a period of strife could ever repeat itself. Fudge (barring any theories that he may in fact be malevolent) seems to provide the perfect example of the Joe Q. Wizard who turns a blind eye to the evidence. He doesn't even say, "Well, it's a possibility; the evidence could go either way." He is vehement in his belief that he is right and Harry is wrong. (I'm sorry, I don't have my GoF on hand so I can't verify this particular passage.) I think a number of wizards would have the same response. I wouldn't blame them; I think that's a perfectly reasonable response considering what many of these wizards have been through before. But most of them would not be convinced that Voldemort had truly returned until he launched his first attacks. Until then, can Dumbledore or Harry or anyone do anything to convince any doubting wizards to prepare for the upcoming onslaught ? That was the import of my question. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From islefrank at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:54:36 2001 From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:54:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <9ulkrs+od39@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011205215436.71496.qmail@web20307.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30906 > This changes the whole dynamic of their > relationship. (snip) > Being beholden to Harry has to be an uncomfortable > position for Snape > to be in. I can see that...I certainly agree that the dynamic has changed. However, I think that there's another dimension to that look in addition to embarassment and worry at being forced to trust Harry. Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something other than hatred or fury. Exactly *what* it is we don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be reckoned with. For someone like Snape, who had stated flat-out that to him, Harry is "nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him," this has got to bring about a bit of a shift. I subscribe to the view that some of Snape's hatred of Harry has always come from the fact that Harry's always been the hero due to no particular skill of his own, and the endings of the first three books (if you are seeing this from the pov of someone who hates Harry and doesn't know all of the facts of the PoA ending) don't contradict this incredibly much. You can't exactly toss aside the end of GoF in the same way. Harry did something incredibly brave -he's faced Voldemort directly, when Snape had never done that- and it forces Snape to consider him a semi-equal. He continues to personally dislike Harry, but he can't think of him as "nothing but a nasty little boy" ever again. Harry probably just never heard Snape screaming "No! NO! I think I'm going to throw up!" when he realized this because his office is so far underground... -Rachel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From islefrank at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:54:49 2001 From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:54:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <9ulkrs+od39@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011205215449.58643.qmail@web20301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30907 > This changes the whole dynamic of their > relationship. (snip) > Being beholden to Harry has to be an uncomfortable > position for Snape > to be in. I can see that...I certainly agree that the dynamic has changed. However, I think that there's another dimension to that look in addition to embarassment and worry at being forced to trust Harry. Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something other than hatred or fury. Exactly *what* it is we don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be reckoned with. For someone like Snape, who had stated flat-out that to him, Harry is "nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him," this has got to bring about a bit of a shift. I subscribe to the view that some of Snape's hatred of Harry has always come from the fact that Harry's always been the hero due to no particular skill of his own, and the endings of the first three books (if you are seeing this from the pov of someone who hates Harry and doesn't know all of the facts of the PoA ending) don't contradict this incredibly much. You can't exactly toss aside the end of GoF in the same way. Harry did something incredibly brave -he's faced Voldemort directly, when Snape had never done that- and it forces Snape to consider him a semi-equal. He continues to personally dislike Harry, but he can't think of him as "nothing but a nasty little boy" ever again. Harry probably just never heard Snape screaming "No! NO! I think I'm going to throw up!" when he realized this because his office is so far underground... -Rachel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From islefrank at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:55:42 2001 From: islefrank at yahoo.com (Rachel Fellman) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <9ulkrs+od39@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011205215542.94228.qmail@web20304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30908 > This changes the whole dynamic of their > relationship. (snip) > Being beholden to Harry has to be an uncomfortable > position for Snape > to be in. I can see that...I certainly agree that the dynamic has changed. However, I think that there's another dimension to that look in addition to embarassment and worry at being forced to trust Harry. Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something other than hatred or fury. Exactly *what* it is we don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be reckoned with. For someone like Snape, who had stated flat-out that to him, Harry is "nothing but a nasty little boy who considers rules to be beneath him," this has got to bring about a bit of a shift. I subscribe to the view that some of Snape's hatred of Harry has always come from the fact that Harry's always been the hero due to no particular skill of his own, and the endings of the first three books (if you are seeing this from the pov of someone who hates Harry and doesn't know all of the facts of the PoA ending) don't contradict this incredibly much. You can't exactly toss aside the end of GoF in the same way. Harry did something incredibly brave -he's faced Voldemort directly, when Snape had never done that- and it forces Snape to consider him a semi-equal. He continues to personally dislike Harry, but he can't think of him as "nothing but a nasty little boy" ever again. Harry probably just never heard Snape screaming "No! NO! I think I'm going to be sick!" when he realized this because the Potions office is so far underground... -Rachel __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 21:56:58 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 21:56:58 -0000 Subject: Who Will Die? In-Reply-To: <9ulv37+htkb@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um57a+ot1k@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30909 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > > Here's a horrid thought. Maybe JKR will kill off all of the > Weasleys > > in one shot. Maybe the DEs will go there in the summer figuring > that > > Harry is visiting there, and just wipe out the whole lot of them. > > Just a big Dark Mark floating over the Burrow, just like Arthur > says > > they used to do. ::shiver:: > > > > I suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe > > she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands > > of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." > > > > Cindy (feeling a little bloodthirsty today) > > > Y'know, I had a similar thought -- that some (at least) of the > Weasleys would die. Arthur, as the now tragic hero of the conflict, > will recieve tons of public support and will be the new Minister of > Magic! I doubt all of them would die, though. It seems as if the > two oldest don't live at home, and Percy could get to that point > too. And Ron may want to spend tons of time over the summer at > Hermione's place (just to make sure she doesn't go to Bulgaria over > the summer...) > > Joshua Dyal Ah... well, you know, Ginny's already been Touched by Evil in CS, and we haven't heard much out of her since then. I wonder if she's destined to be the Expendable Weasley? Considering what she's already gone through, she's got a lot of potential for pathos. From joeblackish at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 22:05:58 2001 From: joeblackish at yahoo.com (joeblackish) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:05:58 -0000 Subject: Lupin's intelligence In-Reply-To: <9c.1776dad1.293fefcf@aol.com> Message-ID: <9um5o6+ot5p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30910 > > Several of the professors > > have mentioned that James was one of the most brilliant wizards of > > his time, and Sirius as well (Dumbledore does at one point, and > > McGonagall/Flit do during the "Butterbeer scene" in PA.) The absence > > of any such credit being given to Remus isn't necessarily damning, > > but it is somewhat telling. I think that the fact that Remus was missing a week out of every month of classes to go turn into a werewolf, yet still managed to graduate from Hogwarts suggests that he must have been quite bright. Also, the amazing amount of class time he was missing could explain why he did not also end up with top grades. It was impressive enough that he managed to keep up a From mss4a at cstone.net Wed Dec 5 22:16:29 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:16:29 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566E@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <9um6bt+klsk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30911 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Hillman, Lee" wrote: > Ah, Melissa, that's only if you assume that this supposed >"power" of Voldemort's is a. mind-reading or b. some other >infallible "art" or "talent." But wait! I don't think he's infallible. I just think it gives him an advantage. No matter whether you think he can read minds or not, you have to admit that a practitioner of the Dark Arts is at an advantage -- they have more options open to them. McGonagall tells Dumbledore that he doesn't use Dark Arts because he's too honorable, not because there's any utilitarian benefit in not using them. So I don't think it's a question of Voldie being infallible at all, just having an advantage over his enemies. > The main thrust of my position remains the same, though: If Severus did not > return to try to spy, one way or another, then what DID he do that both > creates a strategic advantage *and* protects him from Voldermort's wrath? Hang on -- forgive my ignorance here -- do we know that Snape's mission protects him from Voldie? Maybe it's time for me to trot out my original theory (with fear and trembling). Which is that Snape had to cut off his arm to get rid of the Dark Mark, because the Mark (theoretically) gives Voldie an "in" to wherever Snape is. I'm not signing my name to this, just thought I would submit it. > Gwen (staunchly defending a nasty, abusive, unloving, clever, >icy, and dangerous Snape) :D Hey, right on! Melanie From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 22:16:33 2001 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:16:33 -0000 Subject: Hagrid and Snape In-Reply-To: <9um163+n9do@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um6c2+nico@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30912 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "clio44a" wrote: > Interesting reaction from Hagrid, isn't it? Almost as if Hagrid is > covering up for Snape. I mean Hagrid doesn't strike you as someone > who usually is cautious with his opinions. He calls Filch an "old > git", he makes clear that he doesn't like the Malfoys and he tells > Harry to steer clear of the Slytherins. > So why would he defend Snape? Even lie on his behalf (Snape does hate > Harry, as far as we can assume from the books)? Why lie to Harry, > whom Hagrid loves dearly? Hagrid probably even knows about Snape's > shady DE past, and still he defends him. Why? I believe Hagrid definitely knows quite a bit about Snape's past and you are right - Hagrid doesn't want to tell Harry anything about Snape. He wants to change the subject. > It almost looks like Snape *has* a good reason to hate Harry. And > Hagrid seems not only to know about it, but also to understand Snape. > Note that Ddore also tolerates Snapes behaviour towards Harry. > > Let's assume that Hagrid really knows a reason why Snape might > dislike Harry (other than being Harry). >I think there must be more to > Snape's hate of Harry than just a schoolboy grudge of MWPP. > > What do you think? Could there really be a reason for Snape to hate > Harry? And what might that be? I can't come up with anything. Well, I do believe Snape dislikes Harry and it isn't so much because of James but because of 'Harry'. Whatever reason that might be, Hagrid probably knows but doesn't want to tell Harry. I'm with you on the Snape/Hagrid part. Hagrid has never said anything bad about Snape and nor has Snape made any negative remarks about Hagrid. I just don't know what the reason can be for Snape to dislike Harry but I don't think it had anything to do with love for Lily or pure jealously of James. There has to be something else. Koinonia From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Wed Dec 5 22:17:42 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:17:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: Veritaserum, the worth of the wizard world, VWII, mortal peril Message-ID: <200112052217.RAA13647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30913 Emily delurked and wrote: > It doesn't seem inconsistent to me. I believe that they don't use > Veritaserum for the same reasons the (American) police can't use > sodium pentathol or lie detectors whenever they wish to elicit a > confession... Well, first, I don't think either of these methods works as well as veritaserum. And second, I don't think the McCarthy-ish Barty Crouch, Sr., would have let these kinds of considerations slow him down. American and British police presumably don't torture to elicit confessions, either. Crouch authorized the use of the Unforgivable Curses against Death Eaters. and then wrote: > Personally, I think JKR has set the tone for an all-out war -- or, at > the very least, a huge upheaval of wizard society. There are lots of > suggestions that the relationship between wizards and elves, giants, > dementors, maybe even goblins -- maybe even Muggles -- will change > utterly during VWII. I certainly hope so. And I agree with you (and others) about the wizard world not being any worse than the other Muggle civilizations we know of, and just as worth saving, even though it may not have sounded that way in my earlier post. I would just like to see it get improved in the process-- as I have the silly idea has happened a time or two in our own history. Mahoney (formerly Dana) did a nice job puncturing my crackpot theory that Harry might not be a wizard without Voldemort's power in him. I'll settle for his near-Sqibness, though. ;) Cindy the Bloodthirsty wrote: > suppose that would half-crucify JKR to write. Then again, maybe > she'll spare Arthur, who will come home and find eight of the hands > of the family clock permanently set to "mortal peril." > Gack. I hope not. I know we're all supposed to be stoic and "grown up," but to be honest, I had a harder time enjoying GoF, compared to the earlier books, because of the downward turn things are taking. (Alright, I'm not made of very stern stuff. Want to make something of it??) I'm along for the rest of the trip, but I'd really like to see at least a *few* of my favorite characters make it through to start life over in a post-Voldemort era. Losing all the Weasleys this way would cost me most of my enjoyment in the rest of the story. Hopefully JKR feels the same, as she's writing these books for herself first, after all. Elizabeth (Who, despite the gloomy tone of this post, is still snickering over David's Bloody Baron/Snoopy image, even if the Bloody Baron and von Richthofen have nothing to do with each other.) From linman6868 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 22:20:39 2001 From: linman6868 at aol.com (goldenkey26) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:20:39 -0000 Subject: Ron club names (was Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying) In-Reply-To: <9um2bg+j9he@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um6jn+icsa@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30914 Jamie wrote: > > Hoorah! I agree. Ron may struggle with jealousy but that does not > make his destined for evil. He ends his "feud" with Harry after > watching the first half and seeing that Harry is indeed endangered. > This shows he cares more for Harry than the fact that Harry is richer > or more talented. Maybe we should start a new club. Anyone up for > S.A.T.Y.R. (Society Against a Traitorous Young Ron)??? Isn't it odd that Ron-friendly clubs are so prone to naughty sexual connotations? I had to work with C.R.A.B. to avoid it becoming C.R.A.B.S. ! But then again, I remember that Ron is the character who gave us "What were you doing, Percy? We won't tell" and "Can I see Uranus, too, Lavender?" So I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. As founder of C.R.A.B., I shake hands with the SATYRs, but my own policy is a strict wait-and-see holding pattern when it comes to this issue. IMO, JKR has given us plenty of color for Ron's character, but predicting his immediate future actions is difficult because we are strongly attracted by several storyline archetypes that are rarely compatible with one another, or satisfying when pressed too far. Therefore I am sipping hot cider in my little bunker, playing "Hedwig's Theme" on my new piccolo, and nailing up the mailbox to rebuff Anthrax letters. Not to mention lining my beret with aluminum foil. Grinning, winking, ducking, and running, Lisa I. (who likes Amy's What the H(ell), E(verybody) L(oves) L(upin) the best of all the club names, unless there's one I forgot that's even cooler) From mss4a at cstone.net Wed Dec 5 22:24:20 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:24:20 -0000 Subject: Mrs. Figg (WAS Harry's secret-keeper) In-Reply-To: <9ul20l+p2oi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um6qk+mq4o@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30915 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "quasisnow" wrote: "Do you mean this part: Dumbledore: "Sirius, I need you to set off at once. You are to alert Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd". It is Chapter 36: The Parting of The Ways in GoF. " Yep, that's her. "By the way, what do you all think about the old crowd? What does it do exactly? I am thinking that it was a group of wizards headed by Dumbledore to fight against Voldemort's 'reign'. A rather simplistic view, I suppose.. " That's what I take it to be. I think the conventional wisdom is that this group is the Order of the Phoenix that Book 5 will be named after. Presumably they will re-unite to fight Voldie behind Fudge's back. Melanie From ftah3 at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 22:07:56 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 22:07:56 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9um4kf+84tn@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9um5rs+i53n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30916 Emily wrote: > > > Before, the wizarding community was more or less unified > > > against LV and his followers -- how will they cope now that there > > is > > > an apparent split in opinion as to whether he has truly returned ? And then also wrote: > most of them would not be convinced that Voldemort had truly returned > until he launched his first attacks. Until then, can Dumbledore or > Harry or anyone do anything to convince any doubting wizards to > prepare for the upcoming onslaught ? That was the import of my > question. The doubting wizards probably will not be convinced until Voldemort makes his presence publically, irrefutably known ~ probably in the form of an attack. On the other hand, I don't think this dooms the side of Good ~ I don't think they'll cope any less well, simply due to being currently fractured, than was done in the first go- round with Voldemort. You note (and I neglected to quote it ~ sorry) that by the time Voldemort was defeated, it appeared that all wizards were unified at least in terms of wanting to see him vanquished. You also make a comparison with the current Afghan issue, in terms of a general consensus to see terrorism defeated. I think the comparison is a good one in another way: somehow, I would guess that during Voldemort's initial rise to power, there were plenty of doubting wizards, as many as in the current storyline, and that they only unified when he finally did something truly frightening. I imagine that it will be the same this time round. Which isn't good, but I think the wizarding world (the anti-Voldemort side, at any rate) eventually has a chance to cope well enough. Actually, I think the problem this time around is that Dumbledore, unlike Voldemort, is *not* resurging in power/vitality. Dumbledore was the one wizard Voldemort feared, and possibly couldn't defeat ~ but he's aging, and I think is more vulnerable. Is there anyone, after Dumbledore, Voldemort might fear? He doesn't seem to fear Harry, though he hasn't been able to defeat him. I get the impression that Dumbledore might have been the center of the forces against Voldemort before; if he dies, or is proved to no longer be strong enough to frighten Voldemort, is there anyone left who could be the center? Rambling; will pipe down now. Mahoney From linman6868 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 23:35:33 2001 From: linman6868 at aol.com (linman6868 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:35:33 EST Subject: NB: concerning archetypes and theories Message-ID: <3e.159c4c64.29400945@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30917 Hello again -- In my last post, I said that appealing storyline archetypes were "rarely...satisfying if pressed too far." I ought to clarify that by saying that storyline archetypes pressed too far tend to die because there is nothing particular left, only the archetype. Fleshed-out scenarios as held by particular people and delineated in fanfiction, however, are a different matter entirely, precisely because they are so particular, and there's nothing to suggest that they don't (or shouldn't) satisfy the writer or theory-holder until the real JKR thing comes along. Nothing, however, not even my own theories, have satisfied me thus far concerning Ron's future development. Gotta run -- Lisa I. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 23:38:29 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 23:38:29 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <9um6bt+klsk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umb5l+oq9g@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30918 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "mss4a" wrote: > > Hang on -- forgive my ignorance here -- do we know that Snape's > mission protects him from Voldie? Maybe it's time for me to trot > out my original theory (with fear and trembling). Which is that > Snape had to cut off his arm to get rid of the Dark Mark, because > the Mark (theoretically) gives Voldie an "in" to wherever Snape is. > Oh, what a fascinating idea! I'm rather thinking that such a drastic change would have been noticed by Harry during the Leaving Feast at the end of GOF, though. Still, it JKR were to do something like this, you could get all sorts of Lugh-derived schtick out of it; that could be fun. Hrm... could I pretty please and with proper attribution borrow this idea for a fic I'm developing? --Heather (uma) From mollypickle at hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 23:41:23 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 23:41:23 -0000 Subject: HPforGrownups] Re: Fudge/Percy going over and comparism to Les Mis In-Reply-To: <7e.1f062c3e.293fd28f@aol.com> Message-ID: <9umbb3+as7l@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30919 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jefrigo21 at a... wrote: > Molly Wrote........ > What you just said there brings to mind another literary > > character.... anyone read "Les Miserables" by Victor Hugo? Sounds > > like Javert..... the "rules obsessed" policeman who is, in > > technicality, working for good, but really, when you come down to > it, > > is the real force of evil in the book. > > > > Percy sounds like he might slip into those shoes just perfectly > ______________________________________________________ > > _____________________________________________________ > here are my 2 knuts > > > I know of the story, but Javert is an obsessive man who wants all > > of the power. Percey might want this, but he was in Gryffindor. He > > has yet tom prove himself as a former Gryffindor. We have to wait > > and see what happens to him. sometimes the least likely person > will > > wind up doing something amazing, it might be Percey, Bill or > > Charlie. They are in the story for a reason, and they all will > play > > a part in the fight. Hm....... I must disagree with a part of what you wrote there. I'm very, very familiar with the story of Les Mis, having read the entire (uncut) novel twice, including Hugo's large digressions into the Battle of Waterloo, etc. I've done a research paper on the book and characters as well. Javert's character is not so much one grasping for ultimate power but one who destroys himself emotionally in the struggle to bring down a fugitive who is ultimately good yet has been broken and redeemed. Javert *cannot* reconcile that this is possible, the total redemption of a criminal for good, and thus, when Valjean saves his (Javert's) life at the end of the story, the structure and morality of the value system he has set up are blown apart. I see a parallel with Percy in that he so worships and covets a place at the MoM that he may view any lawbreaker (i.e. Sirius) as unredeemable. Percy is one to follow the law exactly and follow his heart second. Those kind of people make dangerous decisions when it comes to mercy judgements. They are not the kind you want to have in the highest seats of power either. -Molly Denton "We will win in the end. We learned many years ago that the rich may have the money, but that the poor have the time." -Cesar Chavez. From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 23:43:22 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 23:43:22 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <9umb5l+oq9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umbeq+q586@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30921 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "mss4a" wrote: > > > > Hang on -- forgive my ignorance here -- do we know that Snape's > > mission protects him from Voldie? Maybe it's time for me to trot > > out my original theory (with fear and trembling). Which is that > > Snape had to cut off his arm to get rid of the Dark Mark, because > > the Mark (theoretically) gives Voldie an "in" to wherever Snape is. > > > > > Oh, what a fascinating idea! I'm rather thinking that such a drastic change would have been noticed by Harry during the Leaving Feast at the end of GOF, though. > > Still, it JKR were to do something like this, you could get all sorts of Lugh-derived schtick out of it; that could be fun. Hrm... could I pretty please and with proper attribution borrow this idea for a fic I'm developing? > > --Heather (uma) OOPSIE... not Lugh. Nuada, I mean. -- Heather (uma) Not the world's foremost expert on Celtic mythology.... From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Wed Dec 5 23:42:10 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:42:10 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Time Turner, Good Old Buckbeak, Knight Bus, and other questions Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30923 I have a few questions to ask. They have been bugging me for a while and I need to know what other people think. I wonder if the time turner will play another role in upcoming books. We saw it PoA and it just might be a step helping the fight against Voldemort. Will Buckbeak be an important role in any other books? We did not really see him in book four. Will the Knight Bus ever be seen again? We are introduced to many things and they are of some kind of importance. Is someone going to show their powers? I heard a rumor about that any ideas you might have?? Jo-Jo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mollypickle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 00:42:36 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:42:36 -0000 Subject: Time Turner, Good Old Buckbeak, Knight Bus, and other questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9umets+muoe@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30924 [Paging Prof. Trelawney....] predictions needed! Really, Jo-Jo, your guess is as good as ours, here. Nobody but JKR can say for certain whether any of these devices will show up in the upcoming books, but as to hints as to whether or not we'll see them again in the future- I'd picked up nothing of the sort. Wait and see is all I can say. I got the feeling from the way Hermione had "turned in" the time turner that it was no longer accessable. It does seem a bit too easy an object to conveniently use again- you know what I mean? I think once was enough. -Molly Denton "You don't get to choose how you're going to die. Or when. You can only decide how you're going to live. Now." -Joan Baez --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jefrigo21 at a... wrote: > I have a few questions to ask. They have been bugging me for a > while and I need to know what other people think. I wonder if the > time turner will play another role in upcoming books. We saw it PoA > and it just might be a step helping the fight against Voldemort. > > Will Buckbeak be an important role in any other books? We did > not really see him in book four. Will the Knight Bus ever be seen > again? We are introduced to many things and they are of some kind of > importance. > > Is someone going to show their powers? I heard a rumor about that any ideas > you might have?? > > Jo-Jo > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 00:51:23 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (jamie_0278) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:51:23 -0000 Subject: Ron club names (was Ron's wand, Turning Evil/dying) In-Reply-To: <9um6jn+icsa@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umfeb+3nrt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30925 Lisa I. wrote - Isn't it odd that Ron-friendly clubs are so prone to naughty sexual connotations?" Ack! I did not put two and two together! I was purly thinking of mythology! I promise! - Jamie who has missed most of the modern age with her nose buried in a dusty volume. (This entails much sneezing) SATYR - In Greek mythology, part bestial, part human creature of the forests and mountains. Satyrs were usually represented as being very hairy and having the tails and ears of a horse and often the horns and legs of a goat. The satyr was similar in appearance to the silenus and Faunus. From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 00:55:53 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:55:53 -0000 Subject: Latin, the "old crowd", Javert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9umfmp+8c8b@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30926 > Elizabeth.Dalton at E... writes: > > > > . Does anyone remember > > McGonnagal ever saying "you-know-who"? > > Yup first Chapter in SS/PS and Dumbledore lectures her to say Voldermort. I > would of thought McGonagall a stronger woman than that. Well after getting to > know her she's really a stronger character than that I guess JKR just wanted > to set up the mystery > -step > > McGonagall is strong, yes, but oh-so-proper. This is a matter of social propriety we are talking about here! Cheers, -Cornflower O'Shea From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Wed Dec 5 23:33:10 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 23:33:10 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <20011205215436.71496.qmail@web20307.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9umarm+mrch@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30927 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rachel Fellman wrote: > Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something > other than hatred or fury. Brilliant! You've put your finger right on what I've been feeling about that scene. >Exactly *what* it is we > don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there > is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled > Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard > the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd > thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be > reckoned with. Talking about "the entire story", what if Snape only now was hearing the "entire story" as in, the details of everything we readers know? There is substantial reason to think, and in some cases to know, that Snape hasn't been getting the full story all these years. Book I - Dumbledore says that everyone knows what happened between Harry and Voldemort, but, of course, he doesn't literally mean that. Everyone knows Harry faced Voldemort down there, but not particularily what happened, except for Harry and Dumbledore, and there was a brief period where Harry was unconscious before Dumbledore came. Anyway, Snape probably didn't know about how Quirrel was burnt, any more than Fred, George, Draco, or Neville knew. Book II - I'm betting Snape didn't learn about the diary in the end. It's a detail I could see Dumbledore keeping quiet for the benefit of the Weasley family. And, of course, if Dumbledore wanted to keep Ginny's role quiet in it, he wouldn't go around accusing Lucius Malfoy of his part in it, especially as there was no proof of it. Book III - Snape never did hear the end of the story till some time later (we don't know when, perhaps as long as the end of GoF?) Book IV - Things come to a head, Snape must do whatever it is, and Dumbledore tells him everything about Harry: as much as we know, maybe some more things. Therefore, any respect for Harry could come from a full knowledge of the past as well as the events of GoF Eileen From meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 01:34:44 2001 From: meepmeepziptang at hotmail.com (sayse22) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:34:44 -0000 Subject: Look of Triumph/Gleam in D's Eye In-Reply-To: <9uk643+86gv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umhvk+pto7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30928 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., halley.orthmeyer at h... wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., joeblackish at y... wrote: > I > > personally think that this suggests Voldemort has made some sort of > > mistake in using Harry's blood which we will find out about later. > A > > little more of the "ancient magic" we keep hearing about. It seems to me that if this were simply a case of ancient magic, Voldemort would be familiar with it as well. After all, he may be the brightest student Hogwarts has ever seen. Sure, he made a mistake by killing Harry after Lily died to protect him, but that was done in rage and in a matter of moments. Voldemort was planning to use Harry's blood months before the attack. Don't you think that in all that time he would have thought through any possible side effects? What makes more sense to me is that this ever-present-in- these-discussions gleam has more to do with something about Harry that is not common knowledge. Maybe something Dumbledore himslef did to Harry, or something his parents did that Dumbledore knows about. I mean, if Harry is indeed the hier of Gryfindor, and people knew that the Potters were being tracked by Voldemort, isn't it possible that some sort of magic would have been used to protect Harry? Something Voldemort would not have found out about? However, Crouch/Moody's reaction to this H/V blood sharing was bugging me until I read these messages. > > Anyway, when this topic is being discussed, I have not so far > noticed > > anyone bringing up that Crouch Jr. also reacts oddly when he finds > out > > the Dark Lord took Harry's blood. I don't have a copy with me (I > had > > to return it to the library - I'd renewed it too many times), but > if I > > remember correctly, their conversation goes something like this. > > > > Crouch: And what did the Dark Lord take from you? > > Harry: My blood. > > Crouch then lets out his breath in a long, low hiss and then grabs > > Harry's arm to look at the cut. > > > > I think that Crouch also having such a strange reaction to this > > suggests that both he and Dumbledore must know something about why > > Voldemort should not have done that. > > > > Many Many thoughts have come to my mind about that line, all of > course seem very wild, until tonight, when reading this post. A > connection that I haven't made before, though it was right in front > of me, I just couldn't see it. Moody and Dumbledore must know one > another very well, and since Dumbledore doesn't know Moody isn't > Moody, but is in fact Crouch Jr, maybe it is possible that Dumbledore > confinds things to Moody not only in this book, but purhaps in the > past. Therefore Crouch knows something, however why doesn't he tell > You Know Who? Leaves a person with much to think about..... > Now the pieces of my little pet theory are really starting to come together. This idea of Dumbledore confiding to Crouch/Moody accounts for Crouch/Moody knowing something that is not just ancient magic and Voldemort not knowing it. What do you think? Sandi From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 01:52:35 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:52:35 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <9umarm+mrch@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umj13+4hj8@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30929 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rachel Fellman wrote: > > Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something > > other than hatred or fury. > > Brilliant! You've put your finger right on what I've been feeling > about that scene. > > >Exactly *what* it is we > > don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there > > is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled > > Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard > > the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd > > thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be > > reckoned with. > > Talking about "the entire story", what if Snape only now was hearing > the "entire story" as in, the details of everything we readers know? > There is substantial reason to think, and in some cases to know, that > Snape hasn't been getting the full story all these years. > > Eileen Alternatively, Snape may have known roughly what the others knew, and simply doubted their conclusions. This would play in with the "Harry is the Phoenix / Heir of Gryffindor" theor as well. I've speculated in the past that Snape may have been extremely skeptical about applying the prophecy to Harry and so has resented the (rest of the?) Order's fixation on and cultivation of the boy. He doesn't seem the type to give much creedence to divination as a rule. During his task, perhaps he encountered something which has finally convinced him that he has been wrong all this time, and that Harry as the Heir may well die in the process of taking down Voldemort. And / Or he may have encountered some details matching details of one of loopy Trelawney's doomfilled predictions. As cranky as Harry makes him, I can't imagine Snape would be comfortable with *that*. -- Heather (uma) From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 01:57:31 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 01:57:31 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry after GoF (was: Lucius Malfoy, Snape's cover) In-Reply-To: <9umj13+4hj8@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umjab+l9vb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30930 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rachel Fellman wrote: > > > Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with something > > > other than hatred or fury. > > > > Brilliant! You've put your finger right on what I've been feeling > > about that scene. > > > > >Exactly *what* it is we > > > don't know, but I'm thinking that somewhere in there > > > is a new -if grudging- respect. The kid has duelled > > > Voldemort and won. By this point Snape must have heard > > > the entire story and realized that no matter what he'd > > > thought of Harry before, that is an achievement to be > > > reckoned with. > > > > Talking about "the entire story", what if Snape only now was hearing > > the "entire story" as in, the details of everything we readers know? > > There is substantial reason to think, and in some cases to know, that > > Snape hasn't been getting the full story all these years. > > > > > > > Eileen > > Alternatively, Snape may have known roughly what the others knew, and simply doubted their conclusions. This would play in with the "Harry is the Phoenix / Heir of Gryffindor" theor as well. I've speculated in the past that Snape may have been extremely skeptical about applying the prophecy to Harry and so has resented the (rest of the?) Order's fixation on and cultivation of the boy. He doesn't seem the type to give much creedence to divination as a rule. > > During his task, perhaps he encountered something which has finally convinced him that he has been wrong all this time, and that Harry as the Heir may well die in the process of taking down Voldemort. And / Or he may have encountered some details matching details of one of loopy Trelawney's doomfilled predictions. As cranky as Harry makes him, I can't imagine Snape would be comfortable with *that*. > > -- Heather (uma) Nearly forgot -- it could also be as simple as Snape's knowing that Voldemort subjected Harry to the Cruciatus and Imperius curses. Snape knows firsthand from his DE days what agony LV has put Harry through - both having experienced them and, we assume, having inflicted them on others. Again, he might not want Harry anywhere around him, but surely he'd regard that agony as beyond the pale. From ladjables at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 01:44:02 2001 From: ladjables at yahoo.com (Ama Byer) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:44:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9um4a6+3imi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011206014402.98338.qmail@web20406.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30931 --- "raolin.rm" wrote: > Yes, clear, but unfortunately incorrect. Several of > the professors > have mentioned that James was one of the most > brilliant wizards of > his time, and Sirius as well (Dumbledore does at one > point, and > McGonagall/Flit do during the "Butterbeer scene" in > PA.) The absence > of any such credit being given to Remus isn't > necessarily damning, > but it is somewhat telling. > > Joshua Dyal Er, forgive me, perhaps I'm missing your point, but what am I incorrect about? I've never denied James' talent. I've stated in my opinion that academic brilliance isn't a necessary qualification for Head Boy; yet it certainly doesn't hurt to have impressive grades. I recall the Butterbeer scene but it doesn't say that's WHY James was Head Boy, so we can't presume it was just his outstanding magical ability. As for Lupin, even if he were a poor student (perhaps he was simply average, or as someone has already offered, a victim of prejudice), this says little about someone's intelligence. Albert Einstein comes to mind here. Since the DADA job was Lupin's first paying job, maybe he spent the almost 20 or so years after Hogwarts immersed in reading and catching up on his education. Since there's no wizard university, it either that or hands on experience. When you're unemployed you've got plenty of time, and James and Sirius could have helped him! All in all, he still could have developed into a competent wizard. Can you tell I'm excessively fond of Lupin?! As I said, if I've missed your point, please do explain, I don't mind feeling like an idiot. Ama __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 02:24:27 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:24:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry after GoF In-Reply-To: <9umj13+4hj8@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011206022427.69135.qmail@web20807.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30932 --- heathernmoore wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Rachel Fellman > wrote: > > > Snape is suddenly looking at Harry with > something > > > other than hatred or fury. A look Harry himself is unable to interpret. A measuring, reassessing look perhaps? They are, after all, no longer just Master and least favorite pupil but comrades in arms in what promises to be tough and dangerous war. They will have to work together and trust each other. Perhaps Snape is trying to get used to that idea. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 02:59:48 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 02:59:48 -0000 Subject: Point of View In-Reply-To: <3C0E8254.B38482FE@ksu.edu> Message-ID: <9ummv4+8478@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30933 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Philip Nel wrote: Philip Nel wrote: > A further question is: is it truly Harry's dream or does it really happen? If we're supposed to believe that it > really happens, then Harry's dream is not a dream but a vision of actual events taking place. In this case, then > perhaps we should omit the third point of view, listed above. > Calypso wrote: > >Actually, the first chapter of GoF *is* sort of in Harry's > >PoV...He dreamed that entire scene. I'm a little confused. I have trouble seeing how this scene can be interpreted as perhaps not having happened. Doesn't the line "Two hundred miles away the boy called Harry Potter woke with a start" (p.19 Raincoast ver.) make it clear that Harry was dreaming the scene simulatneous to its occurance? As an aside, I think it is very confusing to use the term point of view when we really mean what Phil nicely called "A third person voice aligned with" a particular character. In other words, we basically float around the scenes while a voice tells us what is happening and lets us eavesdrop, and that floating generally takes place around Harry, but not always. The Riddle house deviation isn't as much a deviation in terms of "alignment" (Phil, I really do like that term!) as we might think. Remember how we spent the first part of PS "aligned" with Uncle Vernon...In fact it is a very useful device to help build empathy with Harry. The opening chapter defines the bad guy and then we get, in contrast, Harry! It works so well to endear him to us. Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From mirafrac at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 03:10:00 2001 From: mirafrac at hotmail.com (I_was_Xia) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 03:10:00 -0000 Subject: GoF: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And what of the ship? Message-ID: <9umni8+preu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30934 As I was reading "Goblet of Fire" earlier on, I realized that there is no mention whatsoever of any of the Beauxbatons or Durmstrang students attending a class. As we know that there are more Beauxbatons students than just Fleur Delacour, and more Durmstrang students than just Viktor Krum, do they simply not attend courses? Of course, if they did attend at Hogwarts, they wouldn't be in year with Harry and friends, but surely there would be some mention, would there not? Of course, there's also the matter that with the headmasters all at Hogwarts for most of the year, how are the schools handling? There seems to be no mention made. Also, we know that the Durmstrang ship surfaces and stays in the Hogwarts lake, exactly where the second task is held. Yet, there is no mention of it being gone *or* of it being there. More than anything else, I think I'm looking to see if anyone else noticed these things. Thanks. - Kimmie From klawzie at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 03:07:34 2001 From: klawzie at yahoo.com (Klawzie) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:07:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dead Narrative Sources in lit In-Reply-To: <9ul9cr+t61s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011206030734.58176.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30935 Speaking of POV's in the HP series.. let's not forget the first chapter of Sorcer's Stone/Philosopher's Stone. It wasn't really done from anyone's POV. Just an invisible narrator... I'd also like to back up that the first chapter of Goblet of Fire was deffinately from Frank's POV. Harry would never have known about Frank's war injuries, etc. And he certainly wouldn't have dreamed about them, even if it was in a "psychic dream of Harry through Frank's eyes". ~Klawz klawz_hangar at hotmail.com http://klawzie.tripod.com PS: Speaking of Frank B. from Goblet of Fire - is it just me, or did JK write, "he was quite deaf" and then he was listening to minute sounds a few pages later...? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From curry at megsinet.net Thu Dec 6 03:38:37 2001 From: curry at megsinet.net (arcurry) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 03:38:37 -0000 Subject: GoF: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And what of the ship? In-Reply-To: <9umni8+preu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ump7t+pp14@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30936 Kimmie wrote: >As we know that there are more > Beauxbatons students than just Fleur Delacour, and more Durmstrang > students than just Viktor Krum, do they simply not attend courses? My guess is that they studied their schools' curriculum with their headmaster. I doubt it was along the lines of their "normal" studies, but may have been concentrating on skills relevant to the tournament. Who knows, each student could have been assigned a special reseach project related to the tournament, not unlike some gifted/talented programs in Muggle educational institutions. We do know that the headmasters of Durmstrang and Beauxbatons were "helping" their champions, from references made by Hagrid and others, so there had to be at least some type of instruction going on. > Also, we know that the Durmstrang ship surfaces and stays in the > Hogwarts lake, exactly where the second task is held. Yet, there is > no mention of it being gone *or* of it being there. I'm going to assume, since the task took place underwater, the ship wasn't in the way. The lake appears to be rather large (large enough to house a giant squid and a mer-colony), so I doubt having a grandstand set up next to or near the ship would have made any difference, since there wasn't anything to "watch" until the champions, merfolk, and hostages came up to the surface. Arcurry From dairyspice at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 03:59:14 2001 From: dairyspice at hotmail.com (Barb Dickson) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 03:59:14 Subject: Snape's dislike of Harry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30937 Koinonia wrote: >I just don't know what the reason can be for Snape to dislike Harry >but I don't think it had anything to do with love for Lily or pure >jealously of James. There has to be something else. I agree that there definitely could be something besides jealousy of James, but that Snape's resentment of James probably plays a huge role. Imagine: the person in school that you absolutely could not stand. He dies a tragic, horrible death, making him loved that much more, posthumously. His son, only a year old, manages to defeat this horrible horrible wizard, consequently becoming the most famous wizard ever. Everyone knows him, loves him, pities him, etc. And he looks just like his father. You don't know him, but all you ever hear about is how great this kid is. Then, then, you get this great, wonderful wizard in your class. Yeah, I can see where Snape's coming from. -Barb- _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 04:10:23 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:10:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] GoF: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And what of the ship? Message-ID: <10d.9ce3a21.294049af@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30938 Kimmie wrote: As I was reading "Goblet of Fire" earlier on, I realized that there is no mention whatsoever of any of the Beauxbatons or Durmstrang students attending a class. As we know that there are more Beauxbatons students than just Fleur Delacour, and more Durmstrang students than just Viktor Krum, do they simply not attend courses? Of course, if they did attend at Hogwarts, they wouldn't be in year with Harry and friends, but surely there would be some mention, would there not? Of course, there's also the matter that with the headmasters all at Hogwarts for most of the year, how are the schools handling? There seems to be no mention made. Also, we know that the Durmstrang ship surfaces and stays in the Hogwarts lake, exactly where the second task is held. Yet, there is no mention of it being gone *or* of it being there. More than anything else, I think I'm looking to see if anyone else noticed these things. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________ I think they held classes at the carriage and on the ship for the students. Remember we are talking about magic. Or they go to classes with the Hogwarts students. The Durmstrang ship is not like any other ship remember? Jo-Jo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 04:17:06 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 04:17:06 -0000 Subject: Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <20011206014402.98338.qmail@web20406.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9umrg2+ptuq@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30939 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Ama Byer wrote: > As for Lupin, even if he were a poor student (perhaps > he was simply average, or as someone has already > offered, a victim of prejudice), this says little > about someone's intelligence. Albert Einstein comes > to mind here. Since the DADA job was Lupin's first > paying job, maybe he spent the almost 20 or so years > after Hogwarts immersed in reading and catching up on > his education. Since there's no wizard university, it > either that or hands on experience. When you're > unemployed you've got plenty of time, and James and > Sirius could have helped him! All in all, he still > could have developed into a competent wizard. Can you > tell I'm excessively fond of Lupin?! One question. Do we KNOW that there aren't any wizarding universities, or some other kind of advanced schooling beyond what's offered at Hogwarts? Red XIV From klawzie at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 04:34:05 2001 From: klawzie at yahoo.com (Klawzie) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:34:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] GoF: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And what of the ship? In-Reply-To: <9umni8+preu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011206043405.77449.qmail@web14007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30940 --- I_was_Xia wrote: > As I was reading "Goblet of Fire" earlier on, I > realized that there is no mention whatsoever of any >of the Beauxbatons or Durmstrang students attending a >class. I always assumed they had classes on the ship/in their carriage. Like... head from the fire type classes, so they wouldn't have wasted a half year of schooling. :) > Of course, there's also the matter that with the > headmasters all at > Hogwarts for most of the year, how are the schools > handling? There > seems to be no mention made. They can send owls, or head-in-fire conversations with their deputys.... > Also, we know that the Durmstrang ship surfaces and > stays in the > Hogwarts lake, exactly where the second task is > held. Yet, there is > no mention of it being gone *or* of it being there. Well, from my readings, I've "learned" (assumed) the lake was rather large. So the ship could have been relocated to another part of the lake from where the Task took place. Easy as pie. :) ~Klawz klawz_hangar at hotmail.com http://klawzie.tripod.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From klawzie at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 04:39:57 2001 From: klawzie at yahoo.com (Klawzie) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:39:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bloody Baron In-Reply-To: <9ulua1+nnlo@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011206043957.64745.qmail@web14008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30941 Speaking of the Bloody Baron.. I'm currently re-reading SS/PS, and there's this one passage about how Harry sneaks out in the Invisibility Cloak for the first time and goes to the library... where there's a blood-covered book in the Restricted Section. I wonder if the two are related.... There's really no 'evidence' of it, of course. But the Bloody Baron is Slythern, Slytherns are associated with the Dark Arts, more often than not, the book is in the section of books "For those who study advanced DADA"... I wonder if he was trying a spell that required some sacrifice of his own blood... which was a bit too much. Just a random theory. :) ~Klawz klawz_hangar at hotmail.com http://klawzie.tripod.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From babelfisherperson at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 04:48:38 2001 From: babelfisherperson at yahoo.com (babelfisherperson) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 04:48:38 -0000 Subject: GoF: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And what of the ship? In-Reply-To: <9umni8+preu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9umtb6+sic2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30942 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "I_was_Xia" wrote: > As I was reading "Goblet of Fire" earlier on, I realized that there > is no mention whatsoever of any of the Beauxbatons or Durmstrang > students attending a class. As we know that there are more > Beauxbatons students than just Fleur Delacour, and more Durmstrang > students than just Viktor Krum, do they simply not attend courses? > Of course, if they did attend at Hogwarts, they wouldn't be in year > with Harry and friends, but surely there would be some mention, > would there not? Maybe all the Durmstrang & Beauxbatons teachers were there too, and they held their classes somewhere other than the Hogwarts classrooms. How big was Durmstrang's ship, for example? Could they have held class on board? Or maybe this is just more proof that Hogwarts is the best wizarding school there is: they don't stop classes for tournaments, and other schools do. :D > Of course, there's also the matter that with the headmasters all at > Hogwarts for most of the year, how are the schools handling? There > seems to be no mention made. Well, if the students had all come to Hogwarts to watch the tournament, there wouldn't be much going on back at the schools, would there? > Also, we know that the Durmstrang ship surfaces and stays in the > Hogwarts lake, exactly where the second task is held. Yet, there is > no mention of it being gone *or* of it being there. I never gave this any thought at all. I guess the ship just stayed out of the way during the 2nd task. Red XIV From adanaleigh at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 04:51:13 2001 From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 04:51:13 Subject: Newbie hi, who will die, James & Lily, Snape & Harry (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30943 Hi from a newbie! I'm thrilled to find this list. I've been on it all of 24 hours and have been very interested so far. I have some viewpoints I'd like to share & see what you think. I apologize if I cover anything already discussed. Re: who will die I'd pick Lupin or Snape. Lupin because his life as a werewolf hasn't been great so far. Very few people trust him, he can't get a job, and his best friends were killed. He doesn't have anything to look forward to, either. He might view himself as expendable. Snape because he's been thoroughly nasty so far, but from what we can tell, not actually evil since he reformed. He may die trying to redeem himself (see below for more thoughts on Snape). NOT Sirius. Although his life hasn't been great either, he has something to look forward to if he can survive. He will have his friend's son to take care of, and Harry will have the parental substitute that he only realizes at the beginning of GoF that he needs (when his scar hurts, and he doesn't know who to tell). It was a major wrench for Harry (and all of us!) at the end of PoA when we think that Harry will get to live with Sirius, and then that chance is snatched away. To have it permanently gone would be unthinkable. (I REALLY like Sirius--can you tell?) I'd also vote for Dumbledore, because of the major foreshadowing, and also because of the whole Obi-Wan Kenobi thing. Re: James & Lily Does anyone else think that somehow, they might have more parts to play in this whole thing? Not as ghosts or spirits contacted by divination, that is not JKR's style, but somehow. Notice that in the first two books, we don't learn too much about them, but their presence in the mirror of Erised establishes their presence in Harry's mind. In PoA, we learn that Harry looks like his father, acts much like him, and Harry hears his parents' voices when the dementors get near. We learn more about their final moments. In GoF, they actually are characters who play a vital role, their shades emerging from LV's wand (in the wrong order!) to instruct Harry and distract LV. It seems like at each book we learn more and they become more "real". I think it's riddikulus to expect them to be resurrected; this series is set up a bit more realistically than that; but maybe through the pensieve or another device, we might be hearing more from them. Anyone have any thoughts on that? Finally, re Snape & Harry, and why Snape hated Harry before ever knowing him: IMHO! I think Snape is a psychologist's dream patient--twisted, warped, and with a severe inferiority complex. Snape was a Slytherin, and seemingly a loner even among them. It's only natural that he should have resented the popular group of MWPP. Since James was Head Boy, Quidditch player, and everything else, Snape was probably jealous too. But when James saved his life, his resentment turned to hatred. Why? Because he knew he was not and never would be as "good" as James. Not good as in sports or school, but good as in character. Even though Potter and his friends teased and harassed him, when it came down to it, James was a good person. Snape was mean, nasty, and sneaky even then, and knew it, and used it--but he hated himself for being that way, and he hated James Potter because James was everything he was not. He eventually became a Death Eater for many reasons, but chief among them was that he knew Potter never would. He was still trying to prove to himself that he did not _want_ to be good. It was after James and Lily died that he came back to the good side, perhaps because he knew that something he did may have contributed to their deaths. Helping to kill someone he refused to admit that he admired may have been too much for him. So he came to Dumbledore, the only person he knew would believe him, and accepted a teaching post at the school. But he never attained the maturity level to accept himself as he was and stop trying to hold himself to an impossibly high standard that he could never measure up to. So he is still a sneering jerk at the time Harry shows up in PS/SS. He still can't admit, even to himself, that there might be some good in him, and certainly can't admit that he's desperately searching for it. (Darth Vader) He automatically hates Harry because he expects him to be like his father--courageous, brave, a person of character--and he knows he is still not that kind of person yet. In a warped way, he is jealous of Harry--not his fame or his Quidditch skills, but his innocence and character. He also probably feels some lingering guilt about Harry's parents, and we all tend to get angry and lash out at other people when we secretly feel guilty. When Harry is proved to be (mostly) innocent of everything Snape tries to pin on him, Snape nearly goes ballistic, because he needs to prove to himself that Harry is really not as good as he seems. He favors Draco because he believes that the family is not evil, only sneaky and "creative", and he thinks Draco can make Harry miserable, just as he tried to make James miserable. When he finds out Lucius is still involved with the DEs, it seems to startle him. Snape wants the DADA job so badly because he feels that it would be a way to pay back somehow the damage he did as a DE. Some of the children he would be teaching might have lost parents to the DEs (Neville, Harry) and he would be arming them against the same fate, without ever having to betray himself or risk having them think anything good about him. At the end of GoF, when Dumbledore asks for his help, he knows that he owes Dumbledore, and he also knows that if he had been just a bit more forthcoming about what he knew, none of those events might have taken place. (That's also why he turns away before Harry does at the table--he feels guilty.) He sees one more opportunity to find the qualities in himself that he admired in James Potter and his friends, and I think he will risk his life to prove himself to himself. What about it? :) Adana _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 06:05:43 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 06:05:43 -0000 Subject: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 Message-ID: <9un1rn+drt6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30944 I've been turning things over today: - Hagrid's withholding information about Snape from Harry - Dumbledore's utter lack over concern about Snape's loyalty, under circumstances which many readers find a little odd - The sequence of events running during the ten days between Oct 23 and November 2, 1981, especially McGonagall's bizarre lack of information and the Hagrid's equally bizarre disappearing baby trick - Snape's unprovoked, near-total irritation with Harry and his utter lack of perspective regarding Sirius Black and Remus Lupin - Snape's apparent attitude adjustment between Harry's duel with LV and his subtle encounter with Harry at the Leaving Feast -the mystical powers of Life Debts in the wizarding world I have a really OUT THERE theory about how it all might fit together. I wish I could be more articulate about it, but I'll do my best. We are fairly certain that Snape was the individual who tipped off *someone* about Voldemort's intention to murder James and Harry Potter. It is factual that this tip has to have made its way to the Potters somewhat before October 24th. We can reasonably presume that the Potters were *not* living at the Godric's Hollow house when the tipoff came. Since James and Lily Potter appear to have been something of a popular and promising young couple, using Fidelius on the house where they already lived would have served little purpose; easy enough for any Death Eater to find out who the Potters' friends were and lean on them to say where they lived. One would surmise that a person would first need to have a Secret in order to need to have a Secret-Keeper, and I can't picture Fidelius actually operating as a Memory Charm for everyone on earth except the Secret Keeper. So prior to Oct 24, when they worked the charm with Peter, the Potters have to have left their home and fled to the new house. Why was there a house available? Presumably furnished, no less? Was this an unused home which had been left to them as a family legacy? Again, it's not likely to have been the Potter Family Summer House; there would likely have been records about it somewhere in the Ministry or elsewhere. Was this one of the Evans family homes, then? Lily being Muggle-born, its much more unlikely that any of the Death Eaters would have known anything about any of her childhood houses prior to Peter's revelation. The magic-related destruction of one of the Evans houses would have just driven Petunia over the edge. It is factual that Snape was not privy to the source of the leak about the Potters' location in hiding, but we haven't actually been given any strong reason to believe he was *ignorant* of the details of the raid on Godric's Hollow once it came down. In addition to the two murders at the house - which might have gone undetected - the raid *also* resulted rather bizarrely in the destruction of the house itself (HOW???), in such a way that the Muggle officials showed up later. But before the Muggles can arrive, first Hagrid, and then Sirius, both turn up. Hagrid has to have been told by Dumbledore where to go. Due to the last-minute nature of the SK Switch, Sirius may well have been the one person outside of the charm who knew where the Potters were. Hagrid might have Apperated in, but Sirius is of course on his flying motorcycle. As we see with the flying Ford in CS, these enchanted vehicles aren't bullet-train fast. Sirius must have taken a little bit of time in getting there. (How he knew to come? Did Peter draw Sirius out, intending to kill him later in the day?) The fact that they arrive too late to get the Potters away, but before the Muggles arrive, suggests to me that someone in Dumbledore's circle (probably D himself) received another, last-minute warning from Snape, who was able to tell D(?) where (Godric's Hollow!) and when (*tonight*). The tragic timing also suggests to me that Snape may have done this in person and was genuinely unable to get the word to the others in order to have support at the house when it would have helped. Perhaps he didn't have the crucial detail until LV had already left, and Snape had to find some privacy to Apperate into Hogsmeade and then rush to castle. Snape being Snape, I'm sure once he was filled in, he placed the blame for the weakness of the Fidelius Charm plan squarely on the late James Potter's shoulders. Surely the plan was only intended as a temporary measure? So everything is quiet when Hagrid arrives - presumably except for the squalling of baby Harry, with an oozy cut on his forehead and the house in shambles around him. How does Hagrid know that Voldemort is gone? Surely it shouldn't be safe for him to turn up on his own if they don't know exactly what he'll find? I'm guessing that Dumbledore and the Potters (and godfather Sirius?) worked whatever protective magic they had on Harry before the Potters went into hiding, so that Dumbledore has a pretty solid idea what may have been the final outcome should LV have found the Potters. Hagrid half-sorrowfully, half-bewilderedly does what he was asked to do: he retrieves the baby and refuses to give him to Sirius. It isn't clear that he has any idea *why* Sirius has to be snubbed like this, but Hagrid is loyal to Dumbledore. Depressed and enraged by Peter's betrayal and the deaths of his dear friends, blaming himself to a degree, Sirius hands off his motorcycle (what would appear to be a typical pre-suicide move) to Hagrid and sets off to settle the score with Peter. He probably expects to die in the encounter. Hagrid, of course, takes the baby and the motorcycle and flies off to.... .... Privet Drive? Nope. That's the following night. So where *does* he go? To DisneyWorld? To bed? To the moon, Alice? I'm guessing to bed, back at his cottage at Hogwarts, dropping off the baby somewhere that Dumbledore is first. Dumbledore apparently instructs Hagrid to come back late the following evening to pick up the baby and take him at midnight to Privet Drive in Little Whinging, where Dumbledore will meet them again. Someone during the night gets the word out (likely to the MoM) that Voldemort is gone. By morning, it seems as though all of Wizarding Britain learns the news over their breakfast. They perhaps do not have the rest of the yet, though, because when a Harry-less Hagrid runs into McGonagall that morning, she doesn't know the details and Hagrid doesn't tell her much. He also won't tell her where Dumbledore is, but lets the Privet Drive location out, so off she scarpers. The next thing we know, it's midnight. Dumbledore gets to Privet Drive and does his little put-outer schtick, McGonagall has her little "yo, what the hell is going on" moment, and suddenly here comes Hagrid the Hells Angel, once again with Harry in tow. Nobody asks and nobody tells what has gone on all day -- much later we find out about Sirius' being framed. Okay... now here is where I have a schizophrenic breakdown and get to the point of all this: I think Snape's distaste for Harry springs from the mysterious 23-hour period when Dumbledore had Harry in his possession on November 1st. I think the Potters, Sirius, and Dumbledore had had between them a contingency plan for Harry in the event of the Potters' deaths. Considering the coercive power life debts seems to have in the Wizarding World, I suspect there's much more to the relationship between godparent and godchild than meets the eye. The Potters and Sirius, being relative youngsters (they're all only 21) and undoubtedly scared almost witless by the idea of Voldemort targeting them, screwed the pooch with their Fidelius Charm plan. With their substitution of Peter for Sirius, not only were they putting their Secret into very weak hands, they were gambling against making Sirius unable to participate in a binding charm with Harry should they be killed. It was a gamble they lost: Sirius lost the trust of everyone - even Remus Lupin - and most importantly of Dumbledore. In his anger, he raced off to find Peter instead of attempting to explain his innocence to anyone. Again, as above, I think the timing of the raid and of Dumbledore's response is consistent with Snape having come personally to Dumbledore. Probably unknown to Hagrid, perhaps Dumbledore struck a bargain with the penitent Snape: with Sirius out of the picture, Snape could make amends for his Death Eater activity and his untimely warning of LV's raid by stepping in as Harry's protector/"godparent" in a binding charm. Being skeptical about all that prophecy rubbish and not inclined to be fond of this squirmy little Pottergrub, Snape's gut response is sure to have been, "ICK!" But he knows that he's in danger of ending up in Azkaban, however useful he might have seemed as a spy while LV was still around. And now here is Dumbledore offering him this position of trust and responsibility, in spite of every malicious thing he has done when he was under the Dark influence. Not only is he being shown respect and given protection and a purpose by Dumbledore, but it's in the face of and in preference to that damnable Sirius Black. If Snape finds binding his protection to the son of James Potter a little burdensome, at least he knows that the prophecy is all hogwash, and naturally as Dumbledore says, it isn't as though Snape has to raise the kid. Dumbledore intends to put him with relatives where he will be safe until he can attend school, where he'll be far away from the inevitable fame. And so Snape agrees to the arrangement. Over the next few hours, Snape and Dumbledore prepare and perform a ritual which creates a sort of mutual Super Life Debt between Severus and Harry. , In the morning, soon after being so evasive with McGonagall and being certain she has left, Hagrid comes to get Harry and put him down for a nap for an hour or two before setting off on Sirius' flying motorcycle for Surrey. I'm not going to speculate much on how the binding protection enchantment thingie works, but I'm thinking there's some Big Mojo magical obligation on Snape's part to protect Harry against dark magical threats in life. And it's really not that big a deal for the first several years. Snape just puts it out of mind; after the ordeal of the trials and with his increasing responsibilities at the school, his Harry Potter albatross seems such a minor thing. Then the DADA professors start going haywire: something's weird about Quirrell even before he runs off to Albania. People start talking about Voldemort again, and the possibility that he isn't really dead. Dumbledore is concerned enough that he and the staff start planning for bringing the Philosopher's Stone to Hogwarts. Dour Severus finally has to admit to himself that Potter will be at school soon; the kids are all over "Harry this" and "Harry that" and "Professor Snape, do you think Harry Potter will be good at potions?" "Professor Snape, don't you think Harry Potter will be Head Boy?" And the children of the other Death Eaters have started turning up at Hogwarts already. And and and... And then the albatross is at school, and it becomes absolutely clear to Severus that: a) Harry Potter is a detestable little brat just like his father who got himself and his wife and nearly his son *killed,* and b) It doesn't matter whether the prophecy is objectively accurate: Voldemort is after Harry again, Severus is magically bound to help protect him. From dkewpie at pacbell.net Thu Dec 6 07:19:48 2001 From: dkewpie at pacbell.net (kewpiebb99) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 07:19:48 -0000 Subject: Newbie hi, who will die, James & Lily, Snape & Harry (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9un66k+n5c1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30945 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Adana Robinson" wrote: > He eventually became a Death Eater for many reasons, but chief among them > was that he knew Potter never would. He was still trying to prove to > himself that he did not _want_ to be good. It was after James and Lily died > that he came back to the good side, perhaps because he knew that something > he did may have contributed to their deaths. Helping to kill someone he > refused to admit that he admired may have been too much for him. no Snape came back to the good side BEFORE the death of James and Lily as was indicated in GoF. Dumbledore said Snape turned spy for him way before Voldemort disappear. From Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com Thu Dec 6 07:18:22 2001 From: Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com (Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:18:22 EST Subject: Snape's Mission, Reactions. Message-ID: <47.1482c62e.294075be@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30946 I have something to throw in here. If Snape's mission is to pose as a DE and to even pass information to Dumbledore, he would still need to and no doubt needed to (during LV's first reign of terror) act as a DE. I have the feeling that Snape might've had to torture or even kill someone/some people in order to keep LV thinking that he was loyal. I got the impression that this was a little glimpse into the fact that Severus can be afraid of something. Maybe it's not his *own* skin he's really worried about. As for the Snape/Harry moment of eye contact at the end, perhaps Snape is seeing a little of himself in Harry. He knows that Harry is as much a part of this as he is and that Harry will have some tough choices to make/terrible things to deal with. ~Cassie~ From Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com Thu Dec 6 07:25:12 2001 From: Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com (Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:25:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] scar link to voldemort Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30947 Christine suggested: > I had a sudden flash of insight. Harry's scar links him to Voldemort. > Harry 'dreams' events that actually do take place with Voldemort. Could > Voldemort have the same ability, 'dream' events that do take place > with Harry? Would this cause Harry have to be excluded from fight > the dark force war sessions because Voldemort could find out what > they were planning? > > I'm not so sure about this. In GoF Dumbledore says that Harry's connection to LV becomes strongest when LV is near him or when he's feeling murderous. In the first dream, Voldemort kills Frank and in the second, Voldemort tortures Wormtail-both acts of violence resulting from Voldemort's murderous wrath. It could be possible for Voldemort to be capable of the same power. The question is: What about Harry is strong enough to create a link to Voldemort -as Voldemort created a link to Harry when he was feeling murderous? ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From persephone_uk at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 07:41:23 2001 From: persephone_uk at hotmail.com (E S) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 07:41:23 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's hatred of Harry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30948 Barb Dickson wrote: >I agree that there definitely could be something besides jealousy of James, >but that Snape's resentment of James probably plays a huge role. Imagine: >the person in school that you absolutely could not stand. He dies a tragic, >horrible death, making him loved that much more, posthumously. His son, >only >a year old, manages to defeat this horrible horrible wizard, consequently >becoming the most famous wizard ever. Everyone knows him, loves him, pities >him, etc. And he looks just like his father. You don't know him, but all >you >ever hear about is how great this kid is. Then, then, you get this great, >wonderful wizard in your class. Yeah, I can see where Snape's coming from. I thnk the very fact that Harry gets to be the big hero is a big source of Snape's resentment of him. Dumbledore himself said that Snape turned spy "at great personal risk" - he put his life on the line every day for over a year trying to fight Voldemort, but at the end of the day, who gets all the glory for defeating him? A fifteen month old baby with no concept of what he actually did. Add in the fact that said fifteen month old baby was the son of your childhood enemy ... yeah, I'd be pretty po'd too. Emily. "I just met a wonderful new man. He's fictional, but you can't have everything." ~ The Purple Rose of Cairo _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Thu Dec 6 09:39:22 2001 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:39:22 EST Subject: Harry and Voldemort: The "final" battle Message-ID: <39.1ee15f0e.294096ca@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30949 I've just been rereading over some of the discussion conserning the Harry killing LV/LV killing Harry battle and was suddenly struck with a thought that doesn't seem to have been discussed (unless I didn't read carefully enough, of course ^^) Correct me if I am wrong, but it appears that you are assuming if Voldemort and Harry dueled again that Harry would have his wand. I have a feeling that Voldemort will know about how Priori Incantatem works and will somehow take Harry's wand from him. This time, however, he won't let him have it back. Voldemort may be been more noble during their first duel, but he is capable of not playing fair. He should that when he tried to kill a seemingly defenseless baby. Then what will happen? Hmm...perhaps someone will jump in the way {Wormtail? Snape?} to save Harry. I'm seeing Wormtail here. Having that magical bond with Harry, he feels the need to save Harry's life as Harry did his and ends up either trying to jump Voldemort or protecting Harry, losing his own life in the end. I'm not sure how it would end, but those are my others on the space inbetween ^-^ ~Cassie~ From naycsh at rocketmail.com Thu Dec 6 10:07:59 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 10:07:59 -0000 Subject: Time Turner, Good Old Buckbeak, Knight Bus, and other questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ung1v+hdq0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30950 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jefrigo21 at a... wrote: > I have a few questions to ask. They have been bugging me for a > while and I need to know what other people think. I wonder if the > time turner will play another role in upcoming books. We saw it PoA > and it just might be a step helping the fight against Voldemort. > > Will Buckbeak be an important role in any other books? We did > not really see him in book four. Will the Knight Bus ever be seen > again? We are introduced to many things and they are of some kind of > importance. > > Jo-Jo Frankly, I think unless Buckbeak becomes a Fawkes-behave-alike, chances of it playing a major role in future books are slim. Perhaps its immense dislike for insults will come in handy, aye? I have an inexplicable fondness for the Knight Bus though. Harry should consider living on it, instead of going back the Dursleys ;) Stan and Ernie should be good company, eh. siew. From naycsh at rocketmail.com Thu Dec 6 09:33:50 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:33:50 -0000 Subject: Bloody Baron, Red Baron In-Reply-To: <9ulua1+nnlo@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9une1u+hgg0@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30951 Joshua Dyal wrote, > I think that connections between the bloody baron and the red baron > are not going to be very fruitful. I also believe that the blood is > silvery because everything about ghosts is that color. Personally, I > don't think the Bloody Baron is really important, and he's just in > there for "color text" and flavor, really. After some consideration about the Red Baron and the Bloody Baron (I think the Red Baron was killed because he had his picture taken before a mission which went against the superstition.. unless I'm putting the wrong death to the wrong name :]), heh, maybe there wasn't supposed to be a connection after all. Tsk, tsk. About Peeves, I am not so sure that he would be a very important character. The omission of Peeves in the movie (aye, movietalk should be done in the other group but it fits in here, please?) should point to something, and though the movie can't possibly be a reliable source to base suspicions on, I should say that if there was a conscious decision to leave Peeves out (well, he was afterall left out because he wasn't 'nice-looking' enough) and not worry about the repercussions in the sequels, must say something about the character. Or perhaps, since Peeves doesn't really do much in the first four books, there are still plenty of chances to build him up in the second/third sequel. Ah, why do I get the feeling that I've just stuck my foot in my mouth? Unplottable issue: I forgot which post it was and I can't refer to it.. please forgive me, I am in a different timezone which means that I get swamped by messages (4 digests!) every morning. Someone said something about the various magical schools being unplottable and also some forests being so for the protection of magical beasts/animals, and therefore 'invisible' to all including the wizarding community, but then if Hogwarts is unplottable (is it?), how do Harry and Ron find the school at all when they were flying (the car) there? siew. who is finding parallels between the Fidelius Charm and The Mirror of Erised.. excuse me. From mollypickle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 11:43:55 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:43:55 -0000 Subject: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9un1rn+drt6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9unllr+it1h@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30952 Heather, May I be first in saying, You think too much. Especially for one posting at 1 AM. Seriously, though, I'm loving it. What well thought out detail!! I'm amazed. Keep it coming. I'll have to read your post through several more times before I can even comment... you've done some major work there. WOW! -Molly "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun... only the good die young." -Billy Joel --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > I've been turning things over today: > > - Hagrid's withholding information about Snape from Harry > > - Dumbledore's utter lack over concern about Snape's loyalty, under circumstances which many readers find a little odd > > - The sequence of events running during the ten days between Oct 23 and November 2, 1981, especially McGonagall's bizarre lack of information and the Hagrid's equally bizarre disappearing baby trick > > - Snape's unprovoked, near-total irritation with Harry and his utter lack of perspective regarding Sirius Black and Remus Lupin > > - Snape's apparent attitude adjustment between Harry's duel with LV and his subtle encounter with Harry at the Leaving Feast > > -the mystical powers of Life Debts in the wizarding world > > > > I have a really OUT THERE theory about how it all might fit together. I wish I could be more articulate about it, but I'll do my best. > > We are fairly certain that Snape was the individual who tipped off *someone* about Voldemort's intention to murder James and Harry Potter. > > It is factual that this tip has to have made its way to the Potters somewhat before October 24th. We can reasonably presume that the Potters were *not* living at the Godric's Hollow house when the tipoff came. Since James and Lily Potter appear to have been something of a popular and promising young couple, using Fidelius on the house where they already lived would > have served little purpose; easy enough for any Death Eater to find out who the Potters' friends were and lean on them to say where they lived. > > One would surmise that a person would first need to have a Secret in order to need to have a Secret-Keeper, and I can't picture Fidelius actually operating as a Memory Charm for everyone on earth except the Secret Keeper. So prior to Oct 24, when they worked the charm with Peter, the Potters have to have left their home and fled to the new house. > > Why was there a house available? Presumably furnished, no less? Was this an unused home which had been left to them as a family legacy? Again, it's not likely to have been the Potter Family Summer House; there would likely have been records about it somewhere in the Ministry or elsewhere. > > Was this one of the Evans family homes, then? Lily being Muggle- born, its much more unlikely that any of the Death Eaters would have known anything about any of her childhood houses prior to Peter's revelation. The magic-related destruction of one of the Evans houses > would have just driven Petunia over the edge. > > It is factual that Snape was not privy to the source of the leak about the Potters' location in hiding, but we haven't actually been given any strong reason to believe he was *ignorant* of the details of the raid on Godric's Hollow once it came down. > > In addition to the two murders at the house - which might have gone undetected - the raid *also* resulted rather bizarrely in the destruction of the house itself (HOW???), in such a way that the Muggle officials showed up later. > > But before the Muggles can arrive, first Hagrid, and then Sirius, both turn up. Hagrid has to have been told by Dumbledore where to go. Due to the last-minute nature of the SK Switch, Sirius may well have been the one person outside of the charm who knew where the Potters were. Hagrid might have Apperated in, but Sirius is of course on his flying motorcycle. As we see with the flying Ford in CS, these enchanted vehicles aren't bullet-train fast. Sirius must have taken a little bit of time in getting there. (How he knew to come? Did Peter draw Sirius out, intending to kill him later in the day?) > > > The fact that they arrive too late to get the Potters away, but before the Muggles arrive, suggests to me that someone in Dumbledore's circle (probably D himself) received another, last- minute warning from Snape, who was able to tell D(?) where (Godric's Hollow!) and when (*tonight*). The tragic timing also suggests to me that Snape may have done this in person and was genuinely unable to get the word to the others in order to have support at the house when it would have helped. Perhaps he didn't have the crucial detail until LV had already left, and Snape had to find some privacy to Apperate into Hogsmeade and then rush to castle. > > Snape being Snape, I'm sure once he was filled in, he placed the blame for the weakness of the Fidelius Charm plan squarely on the late James Potter's shoulders. Surely the plan was only intended as a temporary measure? > > So everything is quiet when Hagrid arrives - presumably except for the squalling of baby Harry, with an oozy cut on his forehead and the house in shambles around him. How does Hagrid know that Voldemort is gone? Surely it shouldn't be safe for him to turn up on his own if they don't know exactly what he'll find? I'm guessing that Dumbledore and the Potters (and godfather Sirius?) worked whatever protective magic they had on Harry before the Potters went into hiding, so that Dumbledore has a pretty solid idea what may have been the final outcome should LV have found the Potters. > > Hagrid half-sorrowfully, half-bewilderedly does what he was asked to do: he retrieves the baby and refuses to give him to Sirius. It isn't clear that he has any idea *why* Sirius has to be snubbed like this, but Hagrid is loyal to Dumbledore. Depressed and enraged by Peter's betrayal and the deaths of his dear friends, blaming himself to a degree, Sirius hands off his motorcycle (what would appear to be a typical pre-suicide move) to Hagrid and sets off to settle the score with Peter. He probably expects to die in the encounter. Hagrid, of course, takes the baby and the motorcycle and flies off to.... > > .... Privet Drive? Nope. That's the following night. So where *does* he go? To DisneyWorld? To bed? To the moon, Alice? > > I'm guessing to bed, back at his cottage at Hogwarts, dropping off the baby somewhere that Dumbledore is first. Dumbledore apparently instructs Hagrid to come back late the following evening to pick up the baby and take him at midnight to Privet Drive in Little Whinging, where Dumbledore will meet them again. > > Someone during the night gets the word out (likely to the MoM) that Voldemort is gone. By morning, it seems as though all of Wizarding Britain learns the news over their breakfast. They perhaps do not have the rest of the yet, though, because when a Harry-less Hagrid runs into McGonagall that morning, she doesn't know the details and Hagrid doesn't tell her much. He also won't tell her where Dumbledore is, but lets the Privet Drive location out, so off she scarpers. > > The next thing we know, it's midnight. Dumbledore gets to Privet Drive and does his little put-outer schtick, McGonagall has her little "yo, what the hell is going on" moment, and suddenly here comes Hagrid the Hells Angel, once again with Harry in tow. Nobody asks and nobody tells what has gone on all day -- much later we find out about Sirius' being framed. > > Okay... now here is where I have a schizophrenic breakdown and get to the point of all this: > > I think Snape's distaste for Harry springs from the mysterious 23- hour period when Dumbledore had Harry in his possession on November 1st. I think the Potters, Sirius, and Dumbledore had had between them a contingency plan for Harry in the event of the Potters' deaths. Considering the coercive power life debts seems to have in the Wizarding World, I suspect there's much more to the relationship between godparent and godchild than meets the eye. > > The Potters and Sirius, being relative youngsters (they're all only 21) and undoubtedly scared almost witless by the idea of Voldemort targeting them, screwed the pooch with their Fidelius Charm plan. With their substitution of Peter for Sirius, not only were they putting their Secret into very weak hands, they were gambling against making Sirius unable to participate in a binding charm with Harry should they be killed. > > It was a gamble they lost: Sirius lost the trust of everyone - even Remus Lupin - and most importantly of Dumbledore. In his anger, he raced off to find Peter instead of attempting to explain his innocence to anyone. > > Again, as above, I think the timing of the raid and of Dumbledore's response is consistent with Snape having come personally to Dumbledore. Probably unknown to Hagrid, perhaps Dumbledore struck a bargain with the penitent Snape: with Sirius out of the picture, Snape could make amends for his Death Eater activity and his untimely warning of LV's raid by stepping in as Harry's protector/"godparent" in a binding charm. > > Being skeptical about all that prophecy rubbish and not inclined to be fond of this squirmy little Pottergrub, Snape's gut response is sure to have been, "ICK!" But he knows that he's in danger of ending up in Azkaban, however useful he might have seemed as a spy while LV was still around. And now here is Dumbledore offering him this position of trust and responsibility, in spite of every malicious thing he has done when he was under the Dark influence. > > Not only is he being shown respect and given protection and a purpose by Dumbledore, but it's in the face of and in preference to that damnable Sirius Black. If Snape finds binding his protection to the son of James Potter a little burdensome, at least he knows that the prophecy is all hogwash, and naturally as Dumbledore says, it isn't as though Snape has to raise the kid. Dumbledore intends to put him with relatives where he will be safe until he can attend school, where he'll be far away from the inevitable fame. > > And so Snape agrees to the arrangement. Over the next few hours, Snape and Dumbledore prepare and perform a ritual which creates a sort of mutual Super Life Debt between Severus and Harry. , In the morning, soon after being so evasive with McGonagall and being certain she has left, Hagrid comes to get Harry and put him down for a nap for an hour or two before setting off on Sirius' flying motorcycle for Surrey. > > I'm not going to speculate much on how the binding protection enchantment thingie works, but I'm thinking there's some Big Mojo magical obligation on Snape's part to protect Harry against dark magical threats in life. > > And it's really not that big a deal for the first several years. Snape just puts it out of mind; after the ordeal of the trials and with his increasing responsibilities at the school, his Harry Potter albatross seems such a minor thing. > > Then the DADA professors start going haywire: something's weird about Quirrell even before he runs off to Albania. People start talking about Voldemort again, and the possibility that he isn't really dead. Dumbledore is concerned enough that he and the staff start planning for bringing the Philosopher's Stone to Hogwarts. Dour Severus finally has to admit to himself that Potter will be at school soon; the kids are all over "Harry this" and "Harry that" and "Professor Snape, do you think Harry Potter will be good at potions?" "Professor Snape, don't you think Harry Potter will be Head Boy?" > And the children of the other Death Eaters have started turning up at Hogwarts already. And and and... > > And then the albatross is at school, and it becomes absolutely clear to Severus that: > > a) Harry Potter is a detestable little brat just like his father who got himself and his wife and nearly his son *killed,* > > and > > b) It doesn't matter whether the prophecy is objectively accurate: Voldemort is after Harry again, Severus is magically bound to help protect him. From mollypickle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 11:55:27 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:55:27 -0000 Subject: Keep this in mind about the the other wizarding students in GoF Message-ID: <9unmbf+k34m@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30953 To whoever asked about the visiting students in GoF: Remember in the magical world, small objects are not always as small as they look from outside. Remember how a camping tent can be so large and luxurious as to have an entire kitchen and bunkbeds, etc? And how a small trunk had in it a room in which Prof. Moody was imprisoned? Well I think the same thing's implied with the carriage from Beaxbatons and Durmstrang's ship.... that they are quite large inside, perhaps with many classrooms. So educating the students would perhaps be no trouble at all. -Molly Denton "I must go down to the sea again, to the lonely sea and the sky, and all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by" -John Masefield From idouright2 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 14:09:30 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 09:09:30 EST Subject: Peeves, The House Elf? Message-ID: <8b.102e37fb.2940d61b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30954 Ok I know this has been done to death but ever since it was mentioned I've been thinking about it...in the book SS US priting. Chapter 7, the Sorting hat the picture of Peeves looks like a house elf! It just struck me while I was flipping through the books! Maybe Peeves being a Poltergeist is the essence of a whole bunch of bitter house elves! I mean it could happen! -step From bricken at tenbit.pl Thu Dec 6 14:11:04 2001 From: bricken at tenbit.pl (Ev vy) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:11:04 +0100 Subject: Dead Narrative Sources in lit (PoV) References: <20011206030734.58176.qmail@web14006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004901c17e5f$ea71bd40$de08f1d5@OSLII> No: HPFGUIDX 30955 ~Klawz wrote: > Speaking of POV's in the HP series.. let's not forget > the first chapter of Sorcer's Stone/Philosopher's > Stone. It wasn't really done from anyone's POV. Just > an invisible narrator... I wouldn't agree here. As Cornflower O'Shea wrote: << Remember how we spent the first part of PS "aligned" with Uncle Vernon...>> The first part of the first chapter os PS is definintely written from Uncle Vernon's PoV. An invisible narrator (whose PoV it would have been) wouldn't be able to use anything like this: "He put the receiver back down and stroked his moustache, thinking... no, he was being stupid . Potter wasn't such an unusual name. He was sure there were lots of people called Potter who had a son called Harry. Come to think of it, he wasn't even sure his nephew //was// called Harry." The invisible narrator would relate only what s/he would see and not the character's thoughts, fears, etc. And the times of omnscient narrators are long gone. The reader gets an insight into the character's thoughts, etc. And it's Uncle Vernon's perspective. In the second part of the chapter, the narration is third person but the PoV (it's nicely called 'focalization' in the theory of literature, at least by Ms. Rimmon-Kennan) changes. I just leafed through the first chapter and as for the second part ~Klawz is right, the narrator is the focalizer, there's no specified PoV. > I'd also like to back up that the first chapter of > Goblet of Fire was deffinately from Frank's POV. Harry > would never have known about Frank's war injuries, > etc. And he certainly wouldn't have dreamed about > them, even if it was in a "psychic dream of Harry > through Frank's eyes". Here again, the chapter is divided into two parts. First part: with the narrator-focalizer, and the second being Frank's PoV as we are limited to what Frank hears or sees. Then, in the second chapter, we are informed of what Harry remembers form the dream. He might have dreamt of what Frank exactly felt, but the war injuries belong to the first part of the first chapter, where the PoV is sort of general. Ev vy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Thu Dec 6 14:23:31 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:23:31 -0000 Subject: House Elves: Enslaved by Mind? In-Reply-To: <9uju8t+ivcl@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9unv13+o182@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30956 Jenny from Ravenclaw wrote: > Okay. I just came up with this theory while I was in the shower and I thought it was great. I mean, I had to pat myself on the back for it. First, though, I must give much of the credit to David Frankis for putting the initial idea in my head. This is the perfect moment for an announcement I've been sitting on for some time! David and Myrtle announce their special bathroom services partnership! All magical and Muggle beings may apply! Nobody is too dead, too ugly or too newbie to benefit from the full range of Grownup services: - whacky ideas in the shower! - portraits that pass rude remarks as you undress! - insane giggling as you disappear beneath the coloured foam! - wand enhancement for the wizard who has been sold short! - special moaning (supplied by Myrtle) for your enemies! - For an extra consideration we can lock you in with the troll of your choice! Mail us offlist at chamberpots @ hogwarts.ac.uk for our full unexpurgated catalogue! > What if part of the tragedy of the House Elf situation is that their enslavement is in their minds? I mean, what if they have been utterly convinced that serving witches and wizards is their lot in life, but really, they can leave *whenever they want to*? What if there was no spell at all that kept them in servitude to their masters? Wouldn't that add a sad and complicated twist to the whole House Elf subplot? More seriously, I believe there's a bit of both. I think Dobby's behaviour in COS is essentially that of someone who has already made the crucial first step to freedom in his mind: he has decided, beneath the surface veneer of obedience, to do what he thinks is right. The magical (or mental) enslavement does not prevent him visiting Harry (twice), smashing the cake, intercepting his mail, or enchanting the bludger and the barrier. He may even have manipulated Malfoy to bring him to Hogwarts, perhaps as part of a punishment. Once he has developed this frame of mind, the opportunity for complete freedom would eventually come. I have argued before that the behaviour of the Hogwarts House-Elves shows that, underneath, they lack confidence in their own statements of happiness with their state. I think that supports yuor theory. > There is actually a chapter in "The Last Battle" that is similar; the ones who won't open their minds (if I recall properly) are the ones who are convinced they are living in darkness and thus do not physically see the light That was the dwarfs (liberal theologians, I believe). > Wow. I hope that made sense. I also hope I am the first one to have come up with this because I am really impressed with myself here. I'm pretty sure it didn't come up in our last extensive debate. > --jenny from ravenclaw, ready to be torn apart by the vicious listies Myrtle is ready to satisfy any taste, no matter how depraved! David From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Thu Dec 6 14:50:42 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:50:42 -0000 Subject: House Elves: Enslaved by Mind? In-Reply-To: <9uju8t+ivcl@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uo0k2+h9jq@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30957 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Jenny from Ravenclaw" wrote: > Okay. I just came up with this theory while I was in the shower and I > thought it was great. > What if part of the tragedy of the House Elf situation is that their > enslavement is in their minds? I mean, what if they have been utterly > convinced that serving witches and wizards is their lot in life, but > really, they can leave *whenver they want to*? What if there was no > spell at all that kept them in servitude to their masters? Wouldn't > that add a sad and complicated twist to the whole House Elf subplot? An excellent theory, and I don't know if I'm adding much here, but it put me in mind of the fact that they may not perhaps have been "utterly convinved" of their roles in life, but were initially "conditioned" into it. It made me think of the conditioning which takes place in Brave New World from conception - and also the conditioning which takes place in Clockwork Orange. We know that the House Elves have a powerful magic of their own, so it seems very strange that they are subjugated by Wizards. Perhaps, many centuries ago, the Elves were seen as a potential threat/rival to the wizarding world, and someone came up with the idea of enslavement. If this kind of conditioning took place over the centuries, with the older generations of House Elves taking over the conditioning process by doing the same with their offspring, then there would be no need to keep the Elves in place by wizardry. If this is the case, throwbacks such as Dobby wouldn't be as rare as we might think, but he is likely to be unusually strongminded, if the House Elves' mentality has been developed into one of servility and loyalty to their families. It does seem to me that some kind of mental manipulation must have taken place, because we see no other real evidence of how exactly the House Elves are forced into this servitude. Another thing which strengthens the whole of Jenny's argument is the routine punishments they are forced to give themselves. They don't want to do it - they are compelled to. Their masters don't even know whether they have punished themselves or not, most of the time -and probably wouldn't even know if their elves had had a bad thought about them to make punishment necessary. But they still do it. Even after Dobby is free, Harry has to stop him from punishing himself for saying something bad about the Malfoys. If this were mere physical enslavement, this wouldn't be the case, but it is obvious that it goes far deeper than that and that the House Elves have been or are controlled in this way. It is really like an imperious curse which has been deeply ingrained into the House Elves' psyche over the centuries - which is triggered by bad thoughts or disloyal actions. How evil. This is all probably a little far-fetched, but it had me thinking, anyway. Thanks! Catherine Catherine From amendels at lynx.neu.edu Thu Dec 6 14:53:32 2001 From: amendels at lynx.neu.edu (auroraalma) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 14:53:32 -0000 Subject: Magical knitting Message-ID: <9uo0pc+g1nh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30958 I was just thinking of A Tale of Two Cities with Madame Defarge knitting a roster of dead people and it made me think, .... In HP there are a lot of socks and sweaters . Could there be some kind of magic knit into the sweaters or socks, some kind of protection. It would be really funny if that were a kind of armor in this story. Mrs. Weasley knits all of her children and Harry sweaters, surely she wants to protect them. (Though Ron gives his away to Dobby- I hope that does not spell doom for Ron- I like Ron :) )Maybe the protection wears off after a while, which is why they get new ones every year. Or maybe the kids just outgrow them. Dobby knits socks for Harry. Dobby, as an elf, has some pretty powerful magic available to him and certainly wants to protect Harry) and that wouldn't be going against Dumldore's wishes) And now to the loonier theories: 1) Maybe the sock that Harry gave to Dobby becomes magical somehow because of its role in the liberation of Dobby, now Dobby has it so he would benifit from it. 2) A combination of the "somehow staying the Dursleys ( blood relatives) protects Harry theory' and the 'maybe Petunia doesn't really hate Harry after all' theory: Harry wears Uncle Verenon's socks( and I am pretty sure he wears Dudley's as well) maybe they somehow protect him (if they were made by Petunia) ________ And on another note: a while back we were talking about how Petunia might have some magical ability that she tries to supress. In Cos Harry threatens a hedge with fake magic (hocus pocus etc) in from of Dudley. Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so quickly, without investigating? I'd love to hear your thoughts, Aurora who wishes her knitting could be protective or at least reasonably even From toogoodforthisearth at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 15:06:38 2001 From: toogoodforthisearth at yahoo.com (toogoodforthisearth) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:06:38 -0000 Subject: Magical knitting In-Reply-To: <9uo0pc+g1nh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uo1hu+mo81@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30959 I can't remember the exact quote but when Harry asks Dumblebore what he sees in the Mirror doesn't he say something about getting socks and you can never have enough socks. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "auroraalma" wrote: > I was just thinking of A Tale of Two Cities with Madame Defarge knitting a roster of dead people and it made me think, .... > > In HP there are a lot of socks and sweaters . Could there be some kind of magic knit into the sweaters or socks, some kind of > protection. It would be really funny if that were a kind of armor in this story. > > Mrs. Weasley knits all of her children and Harry sweaters, surely she wants to protect them. (Though Ron gives his away to Dobby- I > hope that does not spell doom for Ron- I like Ron :) )Maybe the protection wears off after a while, which is why they get new ones > every year. Or maybe the kids just outgrow them. > > Dobby knits socks for Harry. Dobby, as an elf, has some pretty powerful magic available to him and certainly wants to protect Harry) > and that wouldn't be going against Dumldore's wishes) > > > And now to the loonier theories: > > 1) Maybe the sock that Harry gave to Dobby becomes magical somehow because of its role in the liberation of Dobby, now Dobby > has it so he would benifit from it. > > 2) A combination of the "somehow staying the Dursleys ( blood relatives) protects Harry theory' and the 'maybe Petunia doesn't really > hate Harry after all' theory: > > Harry wears Uncle Verenon's socks( and I am pretty sure he wears Dudley's as well) maybe they somehow protect him (if they were > made by Petunia) > ________ > And on another note: a while back we were talking about how Petunia might have some magical ability that she tries to supress. In > Cos Harry threatens a hedge with fake magic (hocus pocus etc) in from of Dudley. Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he > hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so quickly, without investigating? > > I'd love to hear your thoughts, > Aurora who wishes her knitting could be protective or at least reasonably even From ftah3 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 15:05:01 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:05:01 -0000 Subject: Has LV already infiltrated the MoM? Message-ID: <9uo1et+5ihh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30960 I was wondering...is Fudge really as dense as a brick, truly in denial about the possibility of Voldemort being back in power, at the end of GoF? Or could he possibly be victim of the Imperius curse? The reasons I wonder... ~ I was really, *really* shocked to find that he'd up and *immediately* had a Dementor soul-suck Crouch Jr. as soon as he heard about the guy's existence. Judging from the reaction of Prof. McGonagall, there was no warning. Fudge heard the story, made a snap judgement about Crouch's state of mind, and had him zapped. First time I read that I thought two things: 1) can he *do* that? Does he have the authority? and even if he does, 2) why didn't he consult Dumbledore? He's shown such a dependence on Dumbledore's advice in the past, and seeing as this event occurred on Dumbledore's turf, in regards Harry Potter and a man who had been posing as a Hogwarts professor for a year ~ why didn't he talk to Dumbledore before zapping Crouch? ~ When Dumbledore brings up the fact of Voldemort's return, Fudge gets a 'dreamy' sort of look in his eyes. Then he poo-poo's the idea, and all but accuses Harry of being nuts based on Rita Skeeter's story. His action, and then reaction, seem...too convenient. Too pat. I *can* see where, based on Fudge's personality, it all might be somewhat in character. On the other hand...it also feels a bit wrong. And I wondered, what if someone is controlling him? There is a span of time between Voldemort's failed attempt to kill Harry in the duel/Harry's escape, and Fudge's appearance at Hogwarts with the Dementor. Apparation takes no time at all. And getting rid of Crouch Jr. as well as having control of the Minister of Magic would both be advantages to Voldemort ~ Crouch Jr. couldn't be pumped for more info, and Fudge could squelch any activity within the MoM in preparation against Voldemort. I'm thinking, what if the very influential and not-to-be-turned-away Lucius Malfoy was sent post haste to Fudge after the botched duel? Malfoy either performs the Imperious curse, or lets Voldemort in to do it. They prime Fudge to have Crouch 'kissed,' and to react in a specific way to reports of Voldemort's return. It would explain Fudge's rash and nigh-on idiotic performance, and would be quite a scary little precursor for what's in store as Voldemort and his followers really get in gear to take over everything.... It would also make me very happy, because I felt that particular plot turn was a smidge weak and disappointing in its convenience. Does any of this make sense? Alternately, maybe you've all already discussed this, in which case, apologies for being a rambly bore.... Mahoney From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Thu Dec 6 15:21:05 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:21:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: Dementors & Harry, Snape & Harry, Dumbledore's portrait Message-ID: <200112061521.KAA16750@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30961 Last night I was re-reading a bit of PoA and I noticed this for the first time: in the Quidditch match against Hufflepuff (in which Harry falls off his broom), the Dementors have gathered onto the field and are all *looking at Harry*. This rather weakens Lupin's explanation that they just came in looking for a feast from all the excited students. They aren't randomly milling about, soaking up everyone's stray happy thoughts. They're concentrating on one person in particular. Harry wasn't the happiest person on the field at the moment-- that was probably Cedric, who was closest to catching the Snitch. So why were they all focusing on him? Then at the end, they try to give him the Kiss, of course. And nobody offers much of an explanation as to why. Even Fudge seems to think that was an unexpected thing for them to do. Maybe it was simply because he was between them and Sirius, whom they intended to Kiss, but maybe not, after all. I suspect there's more to the Dementors' attention toward Harry than I've previously realized. Either they're already working for Voldemort at this point, or they, like the centaurs, Dumbledore, and possibly Snape, know something significant about Harry that we don't. Speaking of whom, Clio and Koinonia posted some pretty interesting speculations about the source of Snape's loathing for Harry. While I wouldn't completely discount Snape carrying his detestation for James over to Harry, and I'm still willing to entertain the secret-torch-for-Lily notion, I agree that there's something else there. I wonder if there was something in Trelawney's first prediction? But even if not, it could be simple jealosy of Harry's fame and good standing, unearned (at the beginning of the series) in Snape's eyes. I even suspect that a lot of his nastiness to other Gryffindors may be *because* of their association with Harry. "You idiotic children have been taken in by this useless child's undeserved reputation-- I have no respect for any of you." (I think this holds up better for Ron and Hermione than for Neville, though. I'm still waiting to hear Snape's excuse for that behavior, which I find appalling.) At bottom, neither Snape nor Harry has viewed the other in an unbiased way to date, with the possible exception of that last scene at the Leaving Feast in GoF. Snape started with whatever preconceptions he had about Harry, and never saw past them to see how much effort Harry was exerting to be worthy of his reputation. Harry started with the dislike of Slytherin, was immediately given pretty harsh treatment by Snape, and subsequently never saw all the things Snape did to try to protect him for what they were worth. I think the scene in the Shrieking Shack is particularly telling. What really puts Snape over the edge is what he perceives as Harry's lack of gratitude for being saved, *yet again*, from two men whom Snape regards as untrustworthy and highly dangerous. Of course, then, as Eileen points out: > what if Snape only now was hearing the "entire story" as in, the > details of everything we readers know? There is substantial reason > to think, and in some cases to know, that Snape hasn't been > getting the full story all these years. Yes, exactly. And even if he had had an opportunity to notice the facts before, he may not have been of a mind to do so until the end of GoF. Another scene I've always found very intriguing is when Harry speaks Parseltongue after Snape gets Malfoy to summon the giant snake at the Dueling Club. I believe that got him a "calculating" look from Snape. What is Snape thinking at this point? How does it relate to what he may think he knows about Harry? Heather suggests: > Alternatively, Snape may have known roughly what the others knew, > and simply doubted their conclusions. This would play in with the > "Harry is the Phoenix / Heir of Gryffindor" theor as well. I've > speculated in the past that Snape may have been extremely > skeptical about applying the prophecy to Harry and so has resented > the (rest of the?) Order's fixation on and cultivation of the boy. > He doesn't seem the type to give much creedence to divination as a > rule. This seems highly plausible. Adana had some interesting psychoanalysis of Snape, but I don't agree with most of it. In particular: > It was after James and Lily died that he came back to the good > side, perhaps because he knew that something he did may have > contributed to their deaths. Nope, Snape was spying on Voldemort when Voldemort was still in action. James and Lily died the night Voldemort went down. The timeline doesn't work, and the rest of it doesn't hang together. Snape is something of a hero-- not because he's noble and good, but because he's doing important work for the good guys, "at great personal risk," despite his general attitude. I can see him being insecure, I can see him having *at one time* felt guilty for his actions as a DE, but he's done his penance. He may still have issues with feeling he's unlikeable and there's no point trying to be likeable, but I don't think lingering guilt enters much into it. I think you're spot on about Malfoy, though. I don't think Snape sees the Malfoys for the threat they are. Time to wake up and smell the pumpkin juice, in my mind. Hey, one more thing. I noticed in PoA last night that Sir Cadogan is having his Christmas Feast with several monks from other portraits, as well as *several previous headmasters.* IIRC, there are several such portraits in Dumbledore's office. This suggests an alternate possibility for how we might still see Dumbledore after he dies. I seriously doubt Dumbledore would come back as a ghost, and I also can't see him channelling through Trelawney, but I *could* see him getting a portrait made which could provide some limited advice after he's gone. I thought this item might have been thrown in to suggest this. Has anyone else noticed that wizard's moving photographs are silent, whereas painted portraits can speak? Or is that just because we've only seen "cheap" photos (on candy cards and newspapers), and speaking images with personality are more difficult to create, whether painting or photograph? Elizabeth (Who really does like Snape -- as anyone can probably tell -- but not, apparently, the way some ladies do....) From cindysphynx at home.com Thu Dec 6 15:23:52 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:23:52 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Home Security Message-ID: <9uo2i8+agmp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30962 I was thinking in the shower today, and I started wondering about the way wizards prevent other wizards from breaking into their homes. In GoF, Sirius breaks into a wizarding home to use the fire while the occupants are away. Also, Snape secures his office with a spell that Moody is able to defeat. >From that, I assume that your average wizarding family puts a spell on their home when they leave to "lock" the home, but someone clever like Sirius can break the spell. The problem, though, is that Sirius almost certainly doesn't have a wand. So how does he break into this wizarding home? The answer, perhaps, is that he simply apparates from outside the wizarding home to the inside and back again. If that is so, then how do wizards protect themselves against burglary-by-apparition? Someone like Pettigrew or Bagman or Karkaroff or Sirius (my, there are quite a lot of wizards on the run these days!) could survive quite nicely by raiding the refrigerator of the closest wizarding family. Indeed, perhaps Sirius does not have to survive on rats in GoF because he could just keep popping into various wizarding homes and fixing himself a quick snack. He says he is worried about stealing too much food in Hogsmeade, but perhaps the families wouldn't notice if he cleaned up after himself. Any thoughts? Cindy (also wondering how on earth Wormtail and Crouch Jr. were able to trick paranoid Moody or break into Moody's home at the beginning of GoF) From Joanne0012 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 15:26:20 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:26:20 -0000 Subject: Magical knitting In-Reply-To: <9uo1hu+mo81@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uo2ms+m27t@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30963 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "toogoodforthisearth" wrote: > I can't remember the exact quote but when Harry asks Dumblebore what > he sees in the Mirror doesn't he say something about getting socks > and you can never have enough socks. Here you go: "What do you see when you look in the mirror?" "I see myself holding a pair of thick, woollen socks." Harry stared. "One can never have enough socks," said Dumbledore. . . . It was only when he was back in bed that it struck Harry that Dumbledore might not have been quite truthful. . . (last page of chapter 12, HPSS) Have you seen the very charming discussion about JKR and socks in the HP Lexicon? Perhaps someone can expand on this essay to include comments on other knitted items such as Weasley sweaters and the house scarves? http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/socks.html From Joanne0012 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 15:47:23 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:47:23 -0000 Subject: paintings versus photos In-Reply-To: <200112061521.KAA16750@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9uo3ub+8b5r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30964 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > Has anyone else noticed that wizard's moving photographs are silent, > whereas painted portraits can speak? Or is that just because we've > only seen "cheap" photos (on candy cards and newspapers), and > speaking images with personality are more difficult to create, > whether painting or photograph? My kids and I just noticed this while recently re-reading the books aloud for the umpteenth time. (Thanks, JKR, for helping me preserve this tradition into their teens!) I suspect, though, our experience at the movie is what really put it into our minds. (My dd, a Tudor fan, spotted a portrait of Anne Boleyn in the hall and wished they could visit.) We decided that the difference is that there is more interpersonal, human effort put into the paintings. They're produced by hand, rather than by chemistry, and are products of a material (paint) rather than just light and shadows. The one hole in our theory is that of course the pictures of witches and wizards on the trading cards aren't photographs (since most of them predate the invention of photography). But (in the muggle world, at least) cards like that are reproduced using printing/photographic techniques -- our theory is saved! Another theory we developed was that since photography is a relatively new process, wizard photo-developing has come up with the moving pictures but not yet the sound, just as muggle movies developed picture images before adding sound. We're still working on concepts like whether it matters whether the person in the painting is dead. And my cynical son pointed out how creepy it would be if Harry could converse with the photos of his parents; it would be worse than the Mirror of Erised. Finally: perhaps only SOME paintings can talk, and these were produced in some special magical way, or enchanted so they can serve as guides and guards throughout Hogwarts. I know it sounds like we have WAY too much time on our hands, but, hey, if my adolescents are willing to have a conversation with me, I'll take what I can get! I'm hoping that eventually we'll work our way up to more in-depth literary discussions. From cindysphynx at home.com Thu Dec 6 15:52:27 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 15:52:27 -0000 Subject: Dementors & Harry, Dumbledore's portrait In-Reply-To: <200112061521.KAA16750@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9uo47r+lnlh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30965 Elizabeth wrote: > Last night I was re-reading a bit of PoA and I noticed this for the > first time: in the Quidditch match against Hufflepuff (in which > Harry falls off his broom), the Dementors have gathered onto the > field and are all *looking at Harry*. This rather weakens Lupin's > explanation that they just came in looking for a feast from all the > excited students. They aren't randomly milling about, soaking up > everyone's stray happy thoughts. > Then at the end, they try to give him the Kiss, of course. And > nobody offers much of an explanation as to why. Even Fudge seems to > think that was an unexpected thing for them to do. Maybe it was > simply because he was between them and Sirius, whom they intended to > Kiss, but maybe not, after all. > I think the things you mention are also really weird. Here are some inconsistent theories: 1. Perhaps the reason the dementors are looking up is that they are focusing on the people in the stadium with the most emotion. That would be the 14 players. Harry thinks they are all looking at him, but really, how would he know that? They don't lower their hoods, so he doesn't know where they are looking, particularly since they don't even have eyes. 2. As for the dementor who tried to Kiss Harry, maybe you have to be conscious for a dementor to kiss you. When they Kiss Crouch Jr. in GoF, he is conscious, although under the influence of Veritaserum. >From the dementor's POV in PoA, they see Sirius, then two more people arrive, then Sirius collapses. They move in, and they sense one conscious person (Harry) with strong emotions, so perhaps they assume it is still Sirius. I have an ulterior motive for proposing Theory No. 2, though. Recall that Snape threatens to take Sirius to the dementors for a Kiss instead of taking Sirius to the castle. When Snape wakes up on the grounds, he finds Sirius, but does not take Sirius to the dementors. One could believe that Snape shows mercy because Snape is fundamentally good and his previous statement was just an empty threat. I prefer to believe Snape desperately wanted to take Sirius to the dementors, but he couldn't because dementors can't Kiss someone who is unconscious. That way, I can keep believing Snape is awful. ;-) Elizabeth again: I > seriously doubt Dumbledore would come back as a ghost, and I also > can't see him channelling through Trelawney, but I *could* see him > getting a portrait made which could provide some limited advice > after he's gone. I thought this item might have been thrown in to > suggest this. > > Has anyone else noticed that wizard's moving photographs are silent, > whereas painted portraits can speak? Or is that just because we've > only seen "cheap" photos (on candy cards and newspapers), and > speaking images with personality are more difficult to create, > whether painting or photograph? > Good observations. Hmmm, you're right that there must be a qualitative difference between the portraits and other wizarding photos. After all, there seems to be much concern about the Fat Lady when Sirius attacks her. Also, Hogwarts portraits have free will and must be capable of experiencing pain, as all decline to replace the Fat Lady except brave little Sir Cadogan. On the other hand, Dumbledore vacates his Chocolate Frog card in PS/SS, and Ron observes that it isn't reasonable to expect Dumbledore to hang around forever. That suggests that the Chocolate Frog pictures aren't ordinary wizarding photos, either. Wizarding pictures seem to be accorded much less respect than Hogwarts photos, as you mentioned. Sirius gathers discarded newspapers in GoF, which suggests that people casually toss out their newspapers, wizarding pictures and all. Let me add that little models of things must be considered much less important than Hogwarts portraits. Ron rips apart his Krum action figure, and no one is aghast about it. Cindy (who is still in a bloodthirsty mood and wonders if Moody's magical eye is really an eye harvested from a dementor) From ftah3 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 16:27:23 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 16:27:23 -0000 Subject: Dementors and Moody's Eye (was: Dementors & Harry, Dumbledore's portrait) In-Reply-To: <9uo47r+lnlh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uo69b+vl9n@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30966 Cindy wrote: > Harry thinks they are all looking at him, > but really, how would he know that? Hmm, you know, I think that the reason that I took at face value that the Dementors were, in fact, looking particularly at Harry is because in my copy of the book (large size paperback, American), there is a black and white illustration at the beginning of the chapter showing a group of dementors standing in a circle on the ground looking up at Harry ~ and only Harry. I was influenced by the illustration; but what influenced the illustrator? Did the illustration also come from assumption, or from behind-the-scenes information? > Cindy (who is still in a bloodthirsty mood and wonders if Moody's > magical eye is really an eye harvested from a dementor) Um...ew? Yes, definitely ew. Mahoney From katycarroll at earthlink.net Thu Dec 6 16:32:18 2001 From: katycarroll at earthlink.net (abberzmama) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 16:32:18 -0000 Subject: Silence regarding the Longbottoms Message-ID: <9uo6ii+s0br@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30967 Hello from a first-time poster... Like others, I often wondered why all the young characters, especially Ron, were unaware of the fate of Neville's parents. If they were so well-known and well-regarded, you'd think their situation would be more common-knowledge. Well...as I was recently reflecting on a time when I lived in a post-Communist country (I was a missionary for my church in Kiev, Ukraine about six years ago), I remembered some rather spooky experiences that make more sense of the silence surrounding the Longbottoms. (I can't believe I didn't think of this earlier -- maybe Neville will lend me his Remembrall?) If I may share... The first experience happened when my fellow missionary and I were walking to a row of outdoor kiosks to buy Gummi bears, of all things. We were only about 50 feet from the kiosks when we saw two groups of camoflauge-attired men, with ski masks on their heads and guns at their sides, dragging two men away from a kiosk. They didn't just politely escort them -- they carried them by their hands and feet and violently threw them into the back of a waiting van. (A native Ukrainian later told me that it was probably a police raid on some illegal operation, such as a racketeering scam.) Well, needless to say, my jaw was on the ground. However, the creepiest part of the experience happened when we walked over to the kiosks. I asked a woman who had been standing RIGHT THERE what had happened. While avoiding my eyes entirely, she woodenly said, "I don't know. I didn't see anything." Everything about her demeanor said "I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT -- DON'T ASK ME ANYTHING". The other experience happened to another missionary who grew up outside of Moscow. As long as she could remember, her grandmother had lived with their family (as is pretty common in Russian culture). However, no one had ever mentioned what had happened to her grandfather. As no one ever spoke of him, she just didn't think to ask until she was a teenager. As it turns out, one night many years ago, some men in black suits came to the door and took him away. And even in their own family, they never spoke of this. I think the parallels between the heyday of the KGB and Voldemort's reign of terror are rather interesting. I don't mean to compare the two organizations, just the mindset that occurs when people live under a cloud of fear. In the Soviet Union, people had no idea who they could trust, who was their true friend, who might turn them in as an "enemy of the people" for something as simple as praying. Sheesh, kids were even programmed in school to report their parents if they did anything that went against the good of the state. Now, to tie this all in to the Longbottoms...It makes sense that most adults, like the woman at the kiosk and my friend's parents, just DON'T WANT TO TALK or even be reminded of the fear that overshadowed so much of their lives, even after baby Harry's initial defeat of Voldemort (and the downfall of Communism). Why re-live it any more than you have to, especially if so many people that you loved were hurt, and further, if you still have the fear that it could lead to you yourself being harmed? I think their silence, right or wrong, has an understandable psychological basis. Lastly, on a related note (thanks for sticking with me!), perhaps this is why Harry still knows relatively little about his parents. Does it seem to anyone else that there is an omnipresent "BIG SECRET" looming around about the Potters? I mean, if I met the orphaned son of people I had known, I would tell him everything I could about his parents. Yet Harry only finds out snippets of information here or there. I'm sure Dumbledore has his reasons, but I wonder why others (Lupin, Sirius, McGonagall, Hagrid, etc.) don't tell Harry more about James and Lily. Hmmm... I've gone on long enough -- thanks for hearing me out! Katya *********** "WE"RE NOT CONFUNDED!" Harry roared. (hee hee -- always makes me laugh) From adanaleigh at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 16:38:21 2001 From: adanaleigh at hotmail.com (Adana Robinson) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 16:38:21 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Magical knitting, + Snape timeline mistake Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30968 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "auroraalma" wrote: >In HP there are a lot of socks and sweaters . Could there be some kind of >magic knit into the sweaters or socks, some kind of >protection. It would be really funny if that were a kind of armor in this >story. > I like this idea. Needlework of all kinds has long been regarded as having magical qualities, not always good. At one time it was believed that pregnant women should not crochet, quilt, etc., as the tying of knots in the string could cause problems with the birthing of the baby--sympathetic magic, I think it's called. Another, opposite, view holds that good luck and protection can be woven into handmade items by the maker. (While not believing in magic, I do a lot of crochet, and I like this idea. If nothing else, making the item helps me focus on the recipient, and I can say a prayer for him/her as I work.) Re the Snape spying timeline mistake...OOOPS! Sorry! Thanks to the better-informed people who pointed that out. :) I still think the rest of the theory might work, though. Snape would have an even better reason to feel guilty if he had tried and been unable to save James & Lily. Adana _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From epoch2 at infi.net Thu Dec 6 17:16:36 2001 From: epoch2 at infi.net (zephyr036) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:16:36 -0000 Subject: The Gray Lady???? Message-ID: <9uo95k+k75f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30969 Okay gang, I am going to toss this question out to see if anyone can answer. I recently heard that JK based one of the Hogwarts ghosts on the legend of the UK's "Gray Lady" ghost. I have been through all four books, several times, and have not found any reference to the "Gray Lady" or even a female ghost at Hogwarts. I am wondering, however, if the "Gray Lady" is not, in fact, the house ghost for Ravenclaw. I know that Gryffindor's house ghost is "Nearly Headless Nick", Slytherin's is "The Bloody Baron" and Hufflepuff's (my own house) is "The Fat Friar", but I have yet to find any reference to the Ravenclaw ghost. Furthermore, does anyone know which faculty member is the head of the house for Ravenclaw? Perhaps, Prof. Flitwick?? From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Dec 6 17:26:06 2001 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (milztoday) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:26:06 -0000 Subject: The Gray Lady???? In-Reply-To: <9uo95k+k75f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uo9ne+o5vp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30970 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "zephyr036" wrote: > Okay gang, I am going to toss this question out to see if anyone > can answer. I recently heard that JK based one of the Hogwarts ghosts > on the legend of the UK's "Gray Lady" ghost. I have been through all > four books, several times, and have not found any reference to > the "Gray Lady" or even a female ghost at Hogwarts. I am wondering, > however, if the "Gray Lady" is not, in fact, the house ghost for > Ravenclaw. I know that Gryffindor's house ghost is "Nearly Headless > Nick", Slytherin's is "The Bloody Baron" and Hufflepuff's (my own > house) is "The Fat Friar", but I have yet to find any reference to > the Ravenclaw ghost. Furthermore, does anyone know which faculty > member is the head of the house for Ravenclaw? Perhaps, Prof. > Flitwick?? Rowling said in an interview some time ago that the House ghost for Ravenclaw was the Grey Lady and Flitwick is the Head of Ravenclaw. The GL isn't mentioned by name in any of the books so far, but in SS/PS Ron and Harry are sneaking through the halls and a tall female ghost flits by them. That is supposed to be the Grey Lady, according to Rowling's interviews. Moaning Myrtle is a female ghost:-) So there are at least two identified female ghosts in Hogwarts. IIRC, in SS/PS, there are about 20 ghosts who enter the Great Hall before Harry's Sorting Ceremony... Milz From epoch2 at infi.net Thu Dec 6 17:32:09 2001 From: epoch2 at infi.net (zephyr036) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:32:09 -0000 Subject: The Gray Lady???? In-Reply-To: <9uo9ne+o5vp@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uoa2p+cj5c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30971 > Rowling said in an interview some time ago that the House ghost for > Ravenclaw was the Grey Lady and Flitwick is the Head of Ravenclaw. > The GL isn't mentioned by name in any of the books so far, but in > SS/PS Ron and Harry are sneaking through the halls and a tall female > ghost flits by them. That is supposed to be the Grey Lady, according > to Rowling's interviews. > > Moaning Myrtle is a female ghost:-) So there are at least two > identified female ghosts in Hogwarts. IIRC, in SS/PS, there are about > 20 ghosts who enter the Great Hall before Harry's Sorting Ceremony... > > Milz ********************************************************************** Thanks Milz! I have been trying to figure out The whole Ravenclaw crew! "Moaning Myrtle'! How COULD I have forgotten her????? From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Thu Dec 6 17:37:59 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:37:59 -0000 Subject: Commandments; Christianity of HP Message-ID: <9uoadn+qqmo@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30972 Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > > Ok, here we go with the commandments themselves, in order: I have added some thoughts of my own on most of the commandments - mostly just directions for thinking that require further filling out. > > 1 - You shall have no other gods before me > One might argue that Dumbledore's statement that people have a knack of choosing what is bad for them implicitly accepts a Christian view of sin, and that choosing wealth and (this-worldly) longevity is an empty (read 'idolatry': 'idol' = 'nothing') choice. > > 2 - You shall not make for yourself a graven image... > The mirror of Erised surely figures under this rubric. "Don't waste your time on dreams". I think too, though it would take too long here, that 'Death Eaterism' is underpinned by a false image of what it means to be human (e.g. the desire to reclassify Muggles as Beasts). The non- graven image of God is man in the Judeo-Christian worldview, of course. > > 3 - You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. > > Nobody does this in the books, that I can see. Not true: Voldemort's religious language is surely outrageously blasphemous to any believer: 'my faithful servant' (see Isaiah 53); the demand for the use of symbols like the Dark Mark whatever the risk; death for the apostates Snape and Karkaroff. Note too how Barty Crouch worships Voldemort - the most frightening thing about him is that he is motivated by love, not fear, of V. > 4 - Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. > > Again, perhaps they do, and Rowling simply doesn't mention it. True - but the themes of slavery and freedom, intimately related to the concept of Sabbath rest are there in force. Does Dobby get days off from Malfoy? Dumbledore explicitly recognises the importance of holiday for him. Dumbledore's own desire for socks suggests that he is not driven by his life's work - he drives it. > > 5 - Honor your father and your mother... > > I think it's clear that Harry honors the memory of his parents. Yes, and the rightness of this in the Potterverse is reinforced by the whole Patronus sequence. Also, Voldemort and Crouch Jr. despise their parents. I would say too that the series as a whole lays considerable emphasis on the *origins* of things - to understand the situation of today, we need to go back 50 years to Riddle, and 15 years to MWPP. That implies respect for the past, and your own antecedents. Of course, the Dursleys show no respect for that. > > 6 - You shall not kill. > > Not only doesn't Harry kill anyone, but he stops Black and Lupin from killing > someone whom he has every reason to despise. and Dumbledore endorses the value of Pettigrew's life. Dumbledore and Lupin's respect for people such as Neville is contrasted with Snape's destructive attitude. IRL, people commit suicide from treatment of that sort. > 7 - You shall not commit adultery. > > Well, all the kids are a bit young for this, I guess (and we don't know if any > of the staff are married). Certainly nothing is mentioned in the texts. True - but the whole Yule Ball sequence does hint at the pain and disorder caused by being careless of the affections of others - think how Parvati and Padma react, for example. Parvati's later boasting in a CoMC class suggests she is upset for more than one evening. > > 8 - You shall not steal. No comment here > > 9 - You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. > Uncovering the truth about slandered characters (Hagrid, Sirius) is a major theme for two of the books. It applies to a lesser extent to Bertha Jorkins, Snape, Lupin, Harry's parents (remember that car crash?) and, I'm sure, others. Uncovering villainy is important too - Quirrell, Pettigrew, Bagman, Crouch, Skeeter, Lockhart, Riddle are all initially concealed. > > 10 - You shall not covet [other people's stuff] > > I think the only thing Harry has seriously coveted was the Firebolt, and he > seemed to get over it (even before Sirius sent him one). Arguably, he covets Ron's family-- but he doesn't want > to take anything away from Ron, either, so I'm not sure that counts. > It does count if it destroys Harry - as the mirror would have done, or if Harry tries to take more affection from the Weasleys than they are prepared to give. Dudley is an example of covetousness run riot. So, too, really, is Voldemort in his all-consuming quest for immortality. Amos Diggory is an intriguing lesser example. Trelawney, Lockhart, Skeeter, and Snape all covet recognition - only Snape resists the temptation, just. Notice that although they don't want to take anything material from others, their covetousness has stolen a sense of reality from Parvati and Lavender, memories from innocent Armenian warlocks, DADA knowledge from 2nd year Gryffindors, Harry's, Hermione's, and Hagrid's reputation, and a whole load of peace of mind from all sorts of people. I would say that HP is suffused with Judeo-Christian morality - as is much British culture. However, distinctively Christian messages are not there, in my opinion. In particular, the ultimate good is not 'love God' but 'to thine own self be true', and no outside source ('salvation') is required to live up to that good - I call that humanism, FWIW. David From absinthe at mad.scientist.com Thu Dec 6 17:42:34 2001 From: absinthe at mad.scientist.com (milztoday) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:42:34 -0000 Subject: scar link to voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uoama+9rq6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30973 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Evil1ClaudeRains at a... wrote: > Christine suggested: > > > > I had a sudden flash of insight. Harry's scar links him to Voldemort. > > Harry 'dreams' events that actually do take place with Voldemort. Could > > Voldemort have the same ability, 'dream' events that do take place > > with Harry? Would this cause Harry have to be excluded from fight > > the dark force war sessions because Voldemort could find out what > > they were planning? > > > > > > I'm not so sure about this. In GoF Dumbledore says that Harry's connection to > LV becomes strongest when LV is near him or when he's feeling murderous. In > the first dream, Voldemort kills Frank and in the second, Voldemort tortures > Wormtail-both acts of violence resulting from Voldemort's murderous wrath. > > It could be possible for Voldemort to be capable of the same power. The > question is: What about Harry is strong enough to create a link to Voldemort > -as Voldemort created a link to Harry when he was feeling murderous? I brought something similar up in a thread a few months ago. In PoA, Harry hears a voice in his head telling him to go ahead and kill Sirius. Harry is at a highly emotional state when he hears this voice. The more and more I thought about it, I wondered if that voice was really Voldemort communicating via the scar. Others on the list remarked that it could be Harry's just too emotionally charged and it's his conscience speaking, not Voldemort. Whatever it is, Dumbledore did seem "triumphant" when he learned that Harry's scar pain ceased after the Voldemort confrontation in GoF. And I highly suspect that the scar link was deeper than we are led to believe. Milz From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 17:54:03 2001 From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:54:03 -0000 Subject: The Gray Lady???? In-Reply-To: <9uo95k+k75f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uobbr+oiik@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30974 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "zephyr036" wrote: > Okay gang, I am going to toss this question out to see if anyone > can answer. I recently heard that JK based one of the Hogwarts ghosts > on the legend of the UK's "Gray Lady" ghost. I have been through all > four books, several times, and have not found any reference to > the "Gray Lady" or even a female ghost at Hogwarts. If you have these kinds of factual questions about some aspect of the Harry Potter universe, just buzz over to the Harry Potter Lexicon and look it up. You'll find the page about Ravenclaw here: http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/ravenclaw.html Pretty much every detail from the books and interviews is to be found in the Lexicon. Steve From cindysphynx at home.com Thu Dec 6 18:04:06 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:04:06 -0000 Subject: scar link to voldemort In-Reply-To: <9uoama+9rq6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uobum+34fi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30975 Milz wrote (about Voldemort communicating with Harry through Harry's scar): > I brought something similar up in a thread a few months ago. In PoA, > Harry hears a voice in his head telling him to go ahead and kill > Sirius. Harry is at a highly emotional state when he hears this > voice. The more and more I thought about it, I wondered if that voice > was really Voldemort communicating via the scar. Others on the list > remarked that it could be Harry's just too emotionally charged and > it's his conscience speaking, not Voldemort. > > Whatever it is, Dumbledore did seem "triumphant" when he learned that > Harry's scar pain ceased after the Voldemort confrontation in GoF. > And I highly suspect that the scar link was deeper than we are led to > believe. > This is an interesting theory, but we probably need more canon support for it to work. Are there other instances in which Harry hears a voice in his head? I can't think of any. There are a number of times when he has the weird feeling of being watched, but sometimes those occasions have other explanations, such as Moody really is watching Harry in the maze. Also, if Voldemort can communicate with Harry through the scar, Voldemort should also have been telling Harry to spare Wormtail, not to knock out Snape, not to Stun Krum, to take the Cup, etc. Why just the one instruction to kill Black, particularly at a time when Voldemort was weaker than he was in GoF? Lastly, I don't recall that Dumbledore seemed triumphant upon learning that Harry's scar pain had ceased. Harry reports his scar burning upon his return to the entrance of the maze (burning "dully on his forehead"). Have I missed something? Cindy From keegan at mcn.org Thu Dec 6 18:05:20 2001 From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 10:05:20 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Silence regarding the Longbottoms In-Reply-To: <9uo6ii+s0br@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011206094725.00ad5bb0@mail.mcn.org> No: HPFGUIDX 30976 At 04:32 PM 12/6/01 +0000,Katya wrote a wonderful comparison between JKR's wizarding world and the Soviet Union which I've snipped since her post is so darn good and should be read by itself: In the first book, Hagrid tells Harry "...Dark days, Harry. Didn't know who ter trust, didn't dare get friendly with strange wizards or witches... terrible things happened." Sounds a lot like the terrifying tale of the hauled-off men and the grandfather. I've said before that the wizards wanted to put the whole awfulness of Voldemort's reign of terror behind them. Shut it away, forget about it and get on with life. It helps explain so many things (which is probably why my pet theory can be shot full of holes). Why the silence on the Longbottoms, why Sirius never got a trial, why it was so easy to excuse the Malfoy alliance with Voldemort... Most of the WWII vets I've known are happy to talk about some of their experiences but almost none of the Vietname war vets want to talk about any of it. Since I'm American, I've had to use my baselines for comparisons so the images of a nasty guerilla war are what I've used to make it work for me. However, Katya's post about the Soviet Union's KGB sounds a lot more like what Hagrid was talking about. Makes me wonder what the MoM did during those dark times. Did they make sudden raids into people's homes or did they sit back? Did wizard inform on wizard? Excellent fodder for stories. So far, we only have the Pensieve chapter to show any of the cleanup after V's fall. I would love to know how many of the DEs actually went to trial. How many of them "suddenly woke up from their fog" and disowned V and were forgiven? (ala Malfoy) I would also love to know how many suspects showed up in their Quiddich robes or other identifying regalia to be petted on the head and let go? The brief glimpses that we get in GoF are fascinating. The volume on this list has been amazing the last few weeks. Seems like each time I download my email, at least twenty new messages appear (as if by magic!). Some really wonderful topics. Is anyone else getting duplicate posts? Catherine in foggy California From LenMachine at aol.com Thu Dec 6 18:19:30 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:19:30 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9um5rs+i53n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uocri+k9i2@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30977 Mahoney wrote: > Actually, I think the problem this time around is that Dumbledore, > unlike Voldemort, is *not* resurging in power/vitality. Dumbledore > was the one wizard Voldemort feared, and possibly couldn't defeat ~ > but he's aging, and I think is more vulnerable. Is there anyone, > after Dumbledore, Voldemort might fear? He doesn't seem to fear > Harry, though he hasn't been able to defeat him. I get the > impression that Dumbledore might have been the center of the forces > against Voldemort before; if he dies, or is proved to no longer be > strong enough to frighten Voldemort, is there anyone left who could > be the center? A good point ! If Dumbledore is the greatest wizard of the modern age, who's No. 2 ? Who could take his place ? I suppose the most obvious answer would be Harry, but it would seem unusual to place a teenager at the head of any anti-LV efforts ... (Although I could see something like that being advocated by a group of Potter-maniacal wizard fanatics. :-) ) Who else ? McGonagall ? Snape ? (I think someone brought up an interesting speculation that those two would be most likely to battle things out.) Someone completely and totally new ? Maybe Nicholas Flamel and his lovely wife will hobble out of the shadows ? :-) Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From ftah3 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 18:31:53 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:31:53 -0000 Subject: Commandments; Christianity of HP In-Reply-To: <9uoadn+qqmo@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uodip+mpnp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30978 For what it's worth: Dave said: > I would say that HP is suffused with Judeo-Christian morality - as is > much British culture. However, distinctively Christian messages are > not there, in my opinion. I agree with both of the above statements. Something I really appreciate about Rowling's stories is that I see a lot of what's called "Hero's Journey" mythology in them. I won't bore you with the details, but Joseph Campbell wrote quite a bit about that particular brand of mythology, showing how specific themes appear in nearly all human mythology ~ and when I say 'all,' he used examples from Eastern *&* Western myths, folklore, and religious stories (Christian Bible writings included). He had a theory that certain themes stand out in human conciousness as needing explication, or celebration, or closure, and these themes appear and reappear in stories around the world and across time, the most popular of which are "Hero's Journey" plots. He also theorized that one of the reasons certain works are so compelling to us ~ i.e., religious tomes, classic myths, etc. ~ are because they appeal to our deepest needs by following the Hero's Journey structure. (Another guy, named Christopher Vogler, applied this to modern popular films and fiction writing, too. To whit, incidentally, George Lucas wrote the entire Star Wars story {including the episodes currently being filmed/released} based on Campbell's book "Hero with a Thousand Faces.") All right, so I have bored you with details. Sorry. I'm a little obsessed with this topic. Anyway, my point: You can certainly make comparisons to the Bible, as well as to "Star Wars," and any other great work of literature/fiction/narrative using Rowling's books because, purposefully or (more probably) unconciously, she has utilized the tenets, structure, and basic details of the Hero's Journey mythology. It doesn't make the comparisons any less valid or useful, but I think they can at least be taken in context. Imho, her message is more general, and rather than expressing a particular dogma, simply aligns with quite a few of them. Thus ends a completely worthless posting session. I could probably write a thesis on the subject ~ but don't worry! I won't. %-\ Mahoney From junkletters at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 18:25:44 2001 From: junkletters at hotmail.com (jjhung_98) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:25:44 -0000 Subject: scar link to voldemort In-Reply-To: <20011205172215.437.qmail@juno.com> Message-ID: <9uod78+hgv1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30979 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "christine breen" wrote: > I had a sudden flash of insight. Harry's scar links him to Voldemort. > Harry 'dreams' events that actually do take place with Voldemort. Could > Voldemort have the same ability, 'dream' events that do take place > with Harry? Would this cause Harry have to be excluded from fight > the dark force war sessions because Voldemort could find out what > they were planning? > > Christine > -- I'd always thought that the scar link was a one way link only. When Voldemort tried to kill Harry, he transferred his powers and insight to him, not the other way around. I think Harry may not only have Voldemort's abilities once he learns more at school, but also may be able to channel Voldemort even when he isn't angry or hateful. Might be useful having the full power of the dark side and be groomed by Dumbledore for good. From idouright2 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 18:44:18 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:44:18 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Magical knitting Message-ID: <14f.54716af.29411682@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30980 In a message dated 12/6/2001 6:58:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, amendels at lynx.neu.edu writes: > And on another note: a while back we were talking about how Petunia might > have some magical ability that she tries to supress. In > Cos Harry threatens a hedge with fake magic (hocus pocus etc) in from of > Dudley. Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he > hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so quickly, > without investigating? > > I'd love to hear your thoughts, > Aurora who wishes her knitting could be protective or at least reasonably > even > I really do think something interesting is going to happen with the Dursley's sometime soon. I have been wondering the same things you have been lately. Maybe Petunia and Mrs. Figg have something they both know but Vernon doesn't? Maybe Petunia's a squib...well we'll find out soon enough I guess! -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mollypickle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 18:46:45 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:46:45 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer Message-ID: <9uoeel+qprc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30981 My apologies if this question has previously been posted, but I'm just wondering: Do we know or are there any guesses as to the alcoholic content of Butterbeer? -Molly Denton "Duffman is thrusting his hips in the direction of the problem!" - Duffman, The Simpsons From beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 18:50:46 2001 From: beyondthelamppost at yahoo.com (jamie_0278) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:50:46 -0000 Subject: The Gray Lady???? In-Reply-To: <9uo95k+k75f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uoem6+tguu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30982 zephyr036 wrote - "Okay gang, I am going to toss this question out to see if anyone can answer. I recently heard that JK based one of the Hogwarts ghosts on the legend of the UK's "Gray Lady" ghost." I actually wonder if JKR could have truly based the "Grey Lady" on an actually ghost because there are so many British ghosts dubbed the "Grey Lady." Here are some examples..... The most popular theory it seems among HP fans is that the "Grey Lady" is the ghost of the Lady Jane Grey who became Queen of England after Edward VI died, those in power hoping to keep a Protestant ruler. Mary I took power nine days later. - http://tudorhistory.org/jane/ & http://www.encyclopedia.com/articles/05425.html There is also the story of a nun who fell in love with a nobleman and was put to death once their affair was discovered - http://www.britannia.com/history/legend/yorkghosts/yorkgt02.html Then there is the Grey Lady as the ghost of a lady who was fatally stabbed at an Inn - http://freespace.virgin.net/martin.lightburn/county/herts.htm (2nd story - scroll down) And as the spectre of a maid who committed suicide - http://www.ghostclub.org.uk/oatlands.htm And this is just what I found in five minutes time. I think "Grey Lady" is just a popular name for a female ghost. From Joanne0012 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 19:06:46 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:06:46 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer In-Reply-To: <9uoeel+qprc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uofk6+dk7f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30983 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "moorequests" wrote: > > My apologies if this question has previously been posted, but I'm > just wondering: > > Do we know or are there any guesses as to the alcoholic content of > Butterbeer? Molly, rather than apologizing, why not use that search box in the upper-right-hand corner? You'll find plenty of (inconclusive) discussion of the content of butterbeer. From junkletters at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 18:43:46 2001 From: junkletters at hotmail.com (jjhung_98) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:43:46 -0000 Subject: Silence regarding the Longbottoms In-Reply-To: <9uo6ii+s0br@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uoe92+ms7h@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30984 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "abberzmama" wrote: > Hello from a first-time poster... > > Like others, I often wondered why all the young characters, > especially Ron, were unaware of the fate of Neville's parents. If > they were so well-known and well-regarded, you'd think their > situation would be more common-knowledge. Well, I just don't see how any parent would let their children know someone was not only brutally tortured, but lost their minds in the process, especially if they were 11 when they first went to school. Most parents would probably say nothing unless specifically asked. From LenMachine at aol.com Thu Dec 6 19:03:53 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:03:53 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum, the worth of the wizard world, VWII, mortal peril In-Reply-To: <200112052217.RAA13647@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9uofep+r498@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30985 joeblackish wrote: > Actually, that is not why [lie detectors and sodium pentathol] are not used to procure evidence. > Both lie detectors and sodium pentathol are inadmissable in court > because of their relatively low accuracy rates. It has nothing to do > with the court system or police being concerned with a citizen's > autonomy. Lie detectors are terribly unreliable, and thus to use one > would at the same time provide no definite new information and also > offer a false sense of security. But I'm not talking about using *evidence* in court. I'm talking about the use of the polygraph itself. Neither the police nor the prosecutor can hold you down and strap you to the machine (or inject you with a so-called "truth serum," though they don't that anymore). Constitutional provisions like the 5th Amendment against self- incrimination protect you from participating in a polygraph test against your will. Yes, you can consent to them -- but the state has to have your consent before they perform the test. In this respect, the American citizen's civil and individual liberties are in fact acknowledged and preserved. joeblackish also wrote: > If we had infallible truth detectors, I believe that we most > definitely would being using them in our courts. The wizarding world > does have this in the form of Veritaserum. Personally, I highly doubt that will ever happen -- either the development of the "perfect" lie detector or its accepted use in law enforcement *without obtaining the defendant's consent*. (At least not without the ACLU filing a few lawsuits. :-) ) This is true even in cases where the defendant gives the God's honest truth. Confessions cannot be admitted where the confession has been obtained unlawfully and without the defendant's informed consent. Miranda may be hokey, but it does have a basis in the Constitution. Courts don't like to throw out cases in which "defective" confessions are involved. But a good judge knows that he has to preserve the defendant's constitutional rights over "practical" considerations. joeblackish also said: > Also, I really don't see > the Ministry respecting their citizens in the way you are suggesting. > If they are willing to authorize use of unforgivable curses on > suspected Death Eaters, send people to Azkaban for life with no trial, > hold trials for certain people only as a show, etc, it seems to me > completely in character for them to use Veritaserum to get the truth > out of suspected Death Eaters in t And Elizabeth also wrote: > And second, I don't think the McCarthy-ish Barty Crouch, Sr., > would have let these kinds of considerations slow him down. American and > British police presumably don't torture to elicit confessions, either. > Crouch authorized the use of the Unforgivable Curses against Death Eaters. I think this is indeed a valid point. I doubt, however, that this is the normal course of wizarding life. In fact, it seems that when one transgresses some regulation, the Ministry sends you that owl within minutes (e.g. Harry's letter from the MOM when Dobby dropped the pudding in CoS). It would seem to me that finding and apprehending DEs, however, is another matter, since they probably escape detection through means of the Dark Arts. My feeling was that the Crouch trials were quite different from a normal wizarding legal proceeding. Quite possibly Crouch was acting individually, with little regulation by the MOM (much as McCarthy did, I'm guessing). Quite possibly he still felt the need for the appearance of order; hence the sham trials. (My fingers are itching to type out an analogy to W's executive order for the use of military tribunals, but we're supposed to avoid politics in this forum. :-) ) Quite possibly Dumbledore acted as a one-man ACLU to prevent the sloppy use of Veritaserum without probable cause for its use. :-) I don't know ... We've yet to *really* find out about what it was like for wizards during those dark days. But, as we Americans know, during times we have lived under the apparent spectre of fear (e.g. the "Reds"), we have stood by and watched our individual liberties being taken away, without protest. Because of this, I don't feel that it's right to say that the Crouch trials are examples of what all MOM procedures are like. Elizabeth also wrote: > I certainly hope so. And I agree with you (and others) about the wizard > world not being any worse than the other Muggle civilizations we know of, > and just as worth saving, even though it may not have sounded that way in > my earlier post. I would just like to see it get improved in the process-- > as I have the silly idea has happened a time or two in our own history. The theme of "redemption" certainly appears time and time again in the canon. :-) Sincerely, Emily A. Chen (I should probably add "Esq." at this point :-) ) From mollypickle at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 19:12:49 2001 From: mollypickle at hotmail.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:12:49 -0000 Subject: Butterbeer In-Reply-To: <9uofk6+dk7f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uofvh+lfu6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30986 Thanks for the tip Joanne, but that didn't turn anything up. So my question still remains.... anyone care to take a guess? -Molly "Smoking kills. If you're killed, you've lost a very important part of your life." -Brooke Shields --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "joanne0012" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "moorequests" wrote: > > > > My apologies if this question has previously been posted, but I'm > > just wondering: > > > > Do we know or are there any guesses as to the alcoholic content of > > Butterbeer? > > Molly, rather than apologizing, why not use that search box in the > upper-right-hand corner? You'll find plenty of (inconclusive) discussion of the > content of butterbeer. From heidit at netbox.com Thu Dec 6 19:32:33 2001 From: heidit at netbox.com (Heidi Tandy) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:32:33 -0500 Subject: ADMIN: A Crash Course In Searching Yahoogroups (was RE: [HPforGrownups] Re: Butterbeer) In-Reply-To: <9uofvh+lfu6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <000201c17e8c$c54a0bd0$1501010a@HeidiTandySystem> No: HPFGUIDX 30987 > > Real-To: "moorequests" > > > Thanks for the tip Joanne, but that didn't turn anything up. So my > question still remains.... anyone care to take a guess? > Actually, Joanne was completely right, but for the newbies who might not be familiar with the Yahoogroups Search System, here's a few hints: 1. Always click on NEXT. Yahoogroups searches in blocks of messages, so just because nothing shows up on the first page doesn't mean nothing's there. Say I want to search for posts discussing Draco as a ferret - I type Draco ferret into the box. Nothing comes up, so I click on NEXT, and then I see a few messages discussing the transfiguration by Barty Crouch. 2. Don't type in a question. This is not Ask Jeeves. Type in the most salient or relevant words. Here, I typed in Butterbeer Alcohol - and I got 4 posts on the first page, including an October 25 post from Vicky deGroote on the exact issue. It's at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/28186 if you want to find it. A few clicks on NEXT and I managed to see another two dozen posts, just this fall. Sometimes, it said: No matches found in the messages searched. Click "Next" to search more messages. And when that happened, I just clicked NEXT. Yahoogroups' search engine isn't the most elegant or easiest to use, but it's not completely worthless, and in the over 32,000 messages in this archive alone, you should be able to find at least a gleam (no, not THAT gleam) of discussion about or at least related to many topics. This isn't to say that things which have been discussed before should never be brought up again. Far from it! But it's a bit disingenous to say There's Nothing About This, or Has Anyone Ever Thought...? When it's something that was brought up, oh, two weeks ago. heidi tandy follow me to FictionAlley - Harry Potter fanfics of all shapes, sizes& ships - only 7 sickles an ounce http://www.fictionalley.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From mss4a at cstone.net Thu Dec 6 19:37:17 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:37:17 -0000 Subject: Snape as spy (again) In-Reply-To: <9umbeq+q586@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uohdd+mcpg@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30988 > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Heather wrote: > > Oh, what a fascinating idea! I'm rather thinking that such a drastic change would have been noticed by Harry during the Leaving Feast at the end of GOF, though. Good point. Maybe the "severing" couldn't be done right away -- maybe a potion needed to be prepared -- hmm, not sure whether I can come up with a plausible explanation. :) > > Still, it JKR were to do something like this, you could get all sorts of Lugh-derived schtick out of it; that could be fun. Hrm... could I pretty please and with proper attribution borrow this idea for a fic I'm developing? Oh! :D Please do. I'm flattered! Hey, email me when it's posted? > OOPSIE... not Lugh. Nuada, I mean. > Not the world's foremost expert on Celtic mythology.... Well apparently you know more about it than I do, because I've never heard of either ... Melanie From keegan at mcn.org Thu Dec 6 19:38:21 2001 From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 11:38:21 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Butterbeer In-Reply-To: <9uofvh+lfu6@eGroups.com> References: <9uofk6+dk7f@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011206113500.00a8cdc0@mail.mcn.org> No: HPFGUIDX 30989 My bet is about 2-3%. More than enough for house elves. Did anyone else catch the Rosie show where they made butterbeer? Ice cream, butter and hot cider. (non alcoholic cider). Sounded way sweet for me. Did you ever wonder if it was a drink like a hot buttered rum and not a brewed beverage? Catherine in California (the spousal unit brews and makes cider and would have a lot to say on the mallus discussion if he wasn't deep in the tournament companies list...) At 07:12 PM 12/6/01 +0000, you wrote: >-Molly > My apologies if this question has previously been posted, but >I'm just wondering: Do we know or are there any guesses as to the >alcoholic content >of Butterbeer? From persephone_uk at hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 19:19:39 2001 From: persephone_uk at hotmail.com (E S) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:19:39 +0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 30990 This is something that has been bothering me for a while. It relates to the recent discussions about wizard attitudes to muggles. Does anyone else find themselves somewhat perturbed by the depiction of muggles in Rowlings world? Their most prevalent representatives are the odious Dursleys and even in minor appearances, such as Mr Roberts at the Quidditch World Cup, muggles are portrayed as ignorant and idiotic and somewhat of a nuisance. Professor McGonagall uses the phrase "the worst kind of muggles" and Hagrid says "a great muggle like you" as an insult. The general consensus seems to be wizards good, muggles bad. Yet on the other hand we are asked to be appalled by the attitudes of wizards like Lucius Malfoy. Now, while I am by no means saying that I find myself sympathising with Lucius et al, I know I wouldnt be too upset if Voldemort knocked off the Durselys and I cannot help but feel as though the idea of muggle protection has more in common with animal welfare than human rights. Does anyone else wish we could have a prominent and sympathetic muggle character? I know we have the muggle borns, like Hermione or Lily, but even that seems to have an attitude like "you dont have to be ashamed of your muggle heritage - youre still a real witch no matter what your parents were." Perhaps Hermiones parents could play a bigger role (incidentally, am I the only one who *really* wants Hermiones mum to be called Helen?!). They are obviously intelligent (with a daughter like Hermione, what else could they be) and judging by their willingness to go shopping in Diagon Alley they have no problem with the magical community - it would be nice to see their perspective. Who knows, perhaps Hermione even has a heretofore unmentioned sibling. Lets face it, we know such a little about her family life beyond the fact that her parents are dentists that anything is possible. We have Lupin to show us that not all werewolves are bad, Hagrid and Madame Maxime promote the nicer side of giants the muggles need someone too! Anyone agree, or am I all by myself here? - Emily. "I just met a wonderful new man. He's fictional, but you can't have everything." ~ The Purple Rose of Cairo _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From katycarroll at earthlink.net Thu Dec 6 20:25:23 2001 From: katycarroll at earthlink.net (abberzmama) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 20:25:23 -0000 Subject: Silence regarding the Longbottoms In-Reply-To: <9uoe92+ms7h@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uok7j+grqo@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30991 jjhung_98 wrote: > Well, I just don't see how any parent would let their children know > someone was not only brutally tortured, but lost their minds in the > process, especially if they were 11 when they first went to school. > Most parents would probably say nothing unless specifically asked. Very good insight. I agree that most parents wouldn't tell their kids this point-blank. I should hope they wouldn't! However, kids often overhear things unbeknownst to their parents, which is why most 11 year-olds discover all sorts of "forbidden" topics from whispers on the school playground. :) Even Ron knows about his accountant uncle, even thought the Weasleys alledgly don't talk about him. IMHO, I think if any adults had ever discussed the Longbottoms aloud, it would have eventually gotten around the Hogwarts community. Similar to the Dark Mark -- this was something wizards were truly terrified of, which is why Ron didn't know what it was in GoF. My two cents! Katya From mrsbekkio at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 20:50:06 2001 From: mrsbekkio at yahoo.com (mrsbekkio) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 20:50:06 -0000 Subject: Has LV already infiltrated the MoM? In-Reply-To: <9uo1et+5ihh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uollu+t77d@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30992 I've been lurking for a couple of weeks and I have really enjoyed the high level of discussion. So here goes my first post: --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "ftah3" wrote: > I was wondering...is Fudge really as dense as a brick, truly in > denial about the possibility of Voldemort being back in power, at the > end of GoF? > > Or could he possibly be victim of the Imperius curse? > > The reasons I wonder... > Mahoney I would not be surprised to see the MoM infiltrated, but I have not seen any evidence that Fudge is the source of it, nor have I seen anything that suggests that he is a victim of the Imerpius Curse. Rather, Fudge's reaction following Voldemort's return follows normal human behavior. I believe that he is grieving, and seems to exhibit the first 2 phases of grief: first denial, then anger. (From the Parting of the Ways) First: Denial - "'Lord Voldemort was giving his instructions, Cornelius,' Dumbledore said. 'Those people's deaths were mere by-products of a plan to restore Voldemort to full strength again. The plan was succeeded. Voldemort has been restored to his body.' "Fudge looked as though someone had just swung a heavy weight into his face. Dazed and blinking, he stared back at Dumbledore as if he couldn't believe what he had just heard" Despite the evidence, Fudge doesn't buy it. Only when pressed repeatedly by Dumbledore does Fudge move onto the next stage: Anger "'I see no evidence to the contrary!' shouted Fudge, now matching her anger, his face purpling. 'It seems to me that you are all determined to start a panic that will destablilize everything we have worked for these last thirteen years.'" IMO, Fudge will definately go through the next two stages of grief: depression, then acceptance. But several questions remain: How long will Fudge be stuck in anger? What effect will Dumbldore's actions have on Fudge's grieving process? (will it stall him in anger?) When he does move on, will he be stuck in depression for long? In any of the first 3 stages, Fudge is pretty much more a waiting doormat that he is otherwise. As for his strength and capability as a Ministry wizard - that definately is in question. One, in SS he constantly is sending owls to Dumbledore for advice. Two, in PoA, the dementors are clearly out of control - i.e. slurping happiness from students on the train, the villagers, Harry at the Quidditch Match, etc. Three, allowing a dementor to kiss Crouch Jr and showing absolutely no concern over this. Bekkio From cindysphynx at home.com Thu Dec 6 21:01:52 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 21:01:52 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra and the Swishing Sound Message-ID: <9uomc0+m3a8@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30993 In GoF, we see Avada Kedavra used four times. 1. When Frank Bryce is killed, "there was a flash of green light, a rushing sound, and Frank Bryce crumpled." 2. When Moody kills the spider, "there was a flash of blinding green light and a rushing sound, as though a vast, invisible something was soaring through the air . . . " 3. When Cedric is killed, it goes like this: "From far away, above his head, he heard a high, cold voice say, "Kill the spare." A swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the words to the night: "Avada Kedavra!" A blast of green light blazed through Harry's eyelids . . ." 4. When Voldemort tries to kill Harry, "a jet of green light issued from Voldemort's wand just as a jet of red light blasted from Harry's." There's no mention of a swishing sound. So what is this swishing sound? With Bryce and the spider, it appears that the swishing sound is the sound of the spell being cast. But with Cedric, the swish happens before the spell is even cast. And when Voldemort casts the spell, there is no swishing noise reported at all (although this might be because Harry is busy shouting Expelliarmus). If the swishing isn't coming from the Avada Kedavra spell itself when Cedric is killed, what is going on? Is this just another glitch in the graveyard scene? Cindy From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu Thu Dec 6 21:21:39 2001 From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (Hillman, Lee) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:21:39 -0500 Subject: paintings vs. photos Message-ID: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0567A@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 30994 Hello, everyone! I'm taking a much needed but don't-have-time-for-it break from thesis writing to respond to topics I barely even remember reading about. Argh. Well, it's almost over. Right? Then I can worry about HP more obsessively than getting my draft in by the deadline. Okay, here we go! Joanne responded to a question about paintings with some neat discussion material! I myself came up against the portrait/photo theory when I was writing my fanfic, because I needed to be in a place with portraits, but where a portrait couldn't speak to ID my hero (who was a spy). Okay, you didn't need to know that, but well... The point is, I explored this question pretty carefully before venturing into its territory. I came up with a lot of the same things Joanne and her teens did. Allow me to draw on the section that explains my theories. Non fanfic readers, fret not, this has nothing to do with plots or any major changes in conception of characters--merely background material. "...The paintings at Hogwarts were somewhat rare. [In the latter half of the 19th century], a Belgian wizard named Cudaq developed the special solution that exposed photographs with the ability to move, but paintings required a much more complex effort. In order to move, a painting had to be prepared using enchanted oils. The varnish could not be too thick, or it would fix the pigments to the canvas and they would be squashed like butterflies under glass. However, other than the worth of the painter's skills, paintings of this type were not too expensive, as the paint formulae became rather commonplace over years of design. "For a painting to speak, the picture was produced using brushes with magical cores like wands, and extra spells applied as the painting dried, in addition to the special oils. Such brushes were rather hard to find, and only the best wizard-artists could afford them. Then too, the spells were unreliable. There was no guarantee, for example, that a painting enchanted to speak would observe any resemblance to the subject's speech. [There was the] famous case of a Venetian lady, who in life was quite demure, but her enchanted painting was downright loquacious. The artist...reversed the spell and froze her in mid-sentence, leaving her mouth in a twisted mockery of a smile. "Far more complicated than either of these was a painting that could leave its frame for another. In fact, ... Hogwarts [is] the only place ... with many portraits who could leave their frames. ...The spells required to allow them to maintain their form while off the canvas [are] too complex, rendering the costs indescribable to the average wizard. Perhaps the amount of magic at work at Hogwarts affected them all, as it prevented Muggle technology from working perfectly. In any case, there were not too many wizards around who seemed to want a painting powerful enough to leave its frame." Now, for those of you who want to point out that Harry and Dumbledore leave their frames, and Penny Clearwater tries to hide her blotchy nose, I will state that the "solution" used to develop photographs, which is of course the one Colin Creevey learns about in CoS, allows them to leave the frame, but NOT to jump into someone else's, which is of course the difference between photos and paintings when it comes to movement. I think of it like imaginary numbers, living behind the blackboard. The subject of a photograph can leave the frame and hide, for example, between the print side and the thick backing of the paper, but can't move to another photo in the album. I suppose photo!Lockhart could perpetually chase photo!Harry around and around the piece of film paper.... Anyway, there are some parallels. I quite like Joanne's theory that it might matter if the wizard's dead, though it wouldn't have helped me out. And note we both think it's important that the effort that goes into a painting makes a difference. Okay, I'm really losing my mind. Sigh. Back to proofread one more time. Due in (checks watch) 45 minutes. Yikes! Gwen From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Thu Dec 6 21:39:16 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:39:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: Snape, Harry vs. V, Fudge, photos, knitting Message-ID: <200112062139.QAA18532@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 30996 Heather wrote something that started with: > I've been turning things over today: Heather, that was one heck of a post. I'm not sure I follow you all the way to the Snape-as-godfather part, but I can certainly see Snape being resentful toward James if he'd gone to great lengths and risks to get the word to them in time, and then it hadn't done any good. Even if it wasn't really James' fault, I could see Snape blaming him, just on general principle and because he needs *someone* to blame for his effort coming to naught. Has anyone ever gotten any info out of JKR (e.g. in an interview) about the mysterious 23 hours? Any chance it's just an error? These things do happen, after all. ~Cassie~ wrote: > Voldemort may be been more noble during their first duel, but he is capable > of not playing fair. He should that when he tried to kill a seemingly > defenseless baby. I don't think Voldemort was trying to be "fair" or "noble" during their last duel. I think he has a leadership problem on his hands. The DEs are muttering about his inability to defeat Harry. He needed to give Harry some play to be able to point to his (he assumed) defeat of Harry as significant. And then he lost after all. Not a good day for the Dark Lord. David responded to a reference to the dwarfs in Lewis' "The Last Battle" by saying: "(liberal theologians, I believe)". Erm, I think "hardline athiest" would be a more accurate term. But I suppose that's OT. Mahoney came up with a cool theory explaining Fudge's idiotic behavior, involving the imperius curse. I like this idea. And, at the risk of having to dodge overripe tomatoes, I'll also suggest that it might not even have been Fudge by that point. I don't think we've necessarily seen the last of Polyjuice Potion. Joanne and her kids had some good ideas about the wizard photo vs. painting issue. I wonder if carefully hand-made photos could have sound added? The still-bloodthirsty Cindy remarked: > On the other hand, Dumbledore vacates his Chocolate Frog card in > PS/SS, and Ron observes that it isn't reasonable to expect Dumbledore > to hang around forever. That suggests that the Chocolate Frog > pictures aren't ordinary wizarding photos, either. I don't think so. Harry gets his picture taken with Lockheart against his will in CoS, and he's struggling to get out of the picture all the time afterward. It might just be more indicative of Dumbledore's quirky personality. I like Aurora's knitting theory (I'm a weaver, myself), but I find the idea of Petunia doing anything as menial (and competent) as knitting completely untenable. I can't believe I'm actually keeping up with the digests.... Elizabeth From mss4a at cstone.net Thu Dec 6 21:42:37 2001 From: mss4a at cstone.net (mss4a) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 21:42:37 -0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uoood+odui@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30997 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "E S" wrote: > Does anyone else find themselves somewhat perturbed by the > depiction of muggles in Rowling's world? Yeah, totally agree. I think this is a real weak point. Although I do think the Roberts family is a fairly sympathetic portrayal -- Mr. Roberts isn't mean (that I recall), and the way they're victimized, you can't help but feel for them. > I cannot help but feel as though the > idea of `muggle protection' has more in common with animal > welfare than human rights. Ooh, interesting. You may have something there. > Does anyone else wish we could have a prominent and > sympathetic muggle character? YES, yes, a thousand times yes! It wouldn't even have to be a MAJOR character. Just a Muggle who we know well, who's nice. > (incidentally, am I the > only one who *really* wants Hermione's mum to be called > Helen?!). Hmm, quite possibly. ;) Way to go on everything else though! Melanie From heath143harry at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 21:52:15 2001 From: heath143harry at yahoo.com (heath143harry) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 21:52:15 -0000 Subject: Gleam in D's Eyes Message-ID: <9uopag+t6m3@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30998 Sandi said: >Anyway, when this topic is being discussed, I have not so >far noticed anyone bringing up that Crouch Jr. also reacts oddly >when >he finds out the Dark Lord took Harry's blood. If I remember >correctly, their conversation goes something like this. >Crouch: And what did the Dark Lord take from you? >Harry: My blood. >Couch then lets out his breath in a long, low hiss and then >grabs Harry's arm to look at the cut. >I think that Crouch also having such a strange reaction to this >suggests that both he and Dumbledore must know something about >why Voldemort should not have done that. >Moody and Dumbledore must know one another very well, and since >Dumbledore doesn't know Moody isn't Moody, but is in fact Crouch Jr, >maybe it is possible that Dumbledore confinds things to Moody not >only in this book, but purhaps in the past. Therefore Crouch knows >something, however why doesn't he tell You Know Who? Ok well, say you were Crouch...wouldn't you want to PERSONALLY tell the Dark Lord what you know to make your glorious reunion with him even more glorious? Wouldn't you want to re-join with a BANG?! And sharing something that Dumbledore had confided with him would have been exactly the way to do that. Crouch obviously had no idea of his fate with the Dementor, and lucky for all of us never got to tell Voldemort what this was. So, yet again, Dumbledore is the only one who knows this secret that caused that gleam in his eye...unless, that is, the REAL Moody knows something? And the REAL Moody makes an appearance in a later book in which this information could be important? Hmm.... Just trying to think intellectually like the rest of you! :) Heather From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Thu Dec 6 21:53:10 2001 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:53:10 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape, Harry vs. V, Fudge, photos, knitting Message-ID: <94.1e365562.294142c6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 30999 Elizabeth wrote: > I don't think Voldemort was trying to be "fair" or "noble" during their last > > duel. I think he has a leadership problem on his hands. The DEs are > muttering > about his inability to defeat Harry. He needed to give Harry some play to > be > able to point to his (he assumed) defeat of Harry as significant. Perhaps I should have been more clear with that. I meant he was being noble in a teasing sort of way. Observing the rules of dueling-the bowing, etc. He was showing mock respect, IMO. Giving Harry a chance to fight back; even if LV was trying to prove who was the stonger. I think Harry would be like Dumbledore. Not willing to use the Dark Arts, even if it bettered his chances. Voldemort, on the other hand has no problem playing dirty. ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 6 21:41:06 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 21:41:06 -0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31000 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "E S" wrote: > Does anyone else find themselves somewhat perturbed by the depiction of > muggles in Rowling's world? I'm not perturbed, exactly, but I'd like to see some more smart ones. >Their most prevalent representatives are the > odious Dursleys and even in minor appearances, such as Mr Roberts at the > Quidditch World Cup, muggles are portrayed as ignorant and idiotic and > somewhat of a nuisance. Here's a list of Muggles mentioned in the stories Book I 1. the Dursleys - odious 2. the newscasters - ordinary, genial TV people 3. Harry's teachers - obviously completely inept in dealing with children, though they seem to have taught him the basics well 4. Harry's classmates - a)Dudley's gang including Piers Polkiss - horrible brats, b) the others - cowards who wouldn't go near Harry 5. the lady at the ice-cream stand - seems to have been nice? 6. the lady at the motel desk - no comment 7. Lily's parents (mentioned by Petunia) - really enthusiastic to have a witch in the family 8. the King's Cross station guard - really rude to Harry 9. Seamus Finnigan's Dad - sticks with his witch wife, and child (children?) Book II 1. That couple (I forget the name) that visit the Dursleys - stupid and awful 2. The Grangers - very nice, rendered rather justly nervous about the wizarding world. 3. Creevey Sr. - what was his job again? I suppose he must have been nice to produce two kids like Colin and Dennis 4. Tom Riddle Sr. - abandons his pregnant wife when he finds she's a witch. Book III 1. Aunt Marge - horrific 2. Colonel Fubster(sp?) - associates with Aunt Marge. What does that say? Book IV 1. The Riddles - According to the villagers, not very nice. 2. The Villagers - Rather prejudiced and gossippy 3. Frank Bryce - The closest thing to a really fine Muggle character. He's old and kind of crotchety, but he stands up to Voldemort, more than Fudge could do, and joins the wizarding ghosts in encouraging Harry and dismaying Voldemort at the end. I want more people like him. 4. The Smeltings School Nurse - Recognized the fact that Dudley needed help! 5. Mr. Roberts - Poor man was zapped with a memory spell every ten minutes, tossed about by the Death Eaters, and given the full memory treatment later, resulting in, according to Arthur Weasley, temporary confusedness. It's rather difficult to determine his real character. If you feel bad about him, like me, remember he probably woke next day to find he was a VERY rich man. Are there any I missed? >I cannot help but feel as though the > idea of `muggle protection' has more in common with animal welfare than > human rights. Yes, I sometimes do get that impression. Dumbledore, though, seems not to be coming from that direction. > Does anyone else wish we could have a prominent and sympathetic muggle 0 > character? I know we have the muggle borns, like Hermione or Lily, but even > that seems to have an attitude like "you don't have to be ashamed of your > muggle heritage - you're still a real witch no matter what your parents > were." Right, see Hagrid's remarks in CoS. Perhaps they don't mean it that way, but it can be annoying. Personally, I don't think this is JKR's fault. I think she is trying to portray the society as thinking this way, but, if we could see better Muggle characters. The only problem is most of the books take place at Hogwarts, which is where you find good characters, and at the Dursleys, Harry isn't exactly exposed to the best of the outside world. As I said, I liked Frank Bryce's small role. I would settle for a few more like that. > Perhaps Hermione's parents could play a bigger role (incidentally, am I the > only one who *really* wants Hermione's mum to be called Helen?!). NO YOU AREN'T! And, that would make Ron Orestes and Viktor Krum that dumb athletic son of Achilles with more wealth? > They are > obviously intelligent (with a daughter like Hermione, what else could they > be) and judging by their willingness to go shopping in Diagon Alley they > have no problem with the magical community. Though, after CoS, they never go to Diagon Alley again. They may have no problem with the magical community, but the magical community, they've learnt, has a problem with them (except for Arthur Weasley who takes them out for a drink, but he probably struck them as weird.) > We have Lupin to show us that not all werewolves are bad, Hagrid and Madame > Maxime promote the nicer side of giants the muggles need someone too! > > Anyone agree, or am I all by myself here? I agree. We should start a club. Can anyone think of an acronym? Eileen From supergirl1024 at yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 22:00:51 2001 From: supergirl1024 at yahoo.com (supergirl1024) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 22:00:51 -0000 Subject: No subject In-Reply-To: <9uonka+hsfk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uopqj+9pse@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31001 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cloud_walkinguk" wrote: > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > > > Frances > > Celebrate Harry's and Draco's 21st birthdays: > http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Frances_Potter/Coming_Of_Age/ > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_comingofage maybe one of the ones harry was practicing for the third task in? From UcfRentLuvr at cs.com Thu Dec 6 22:11:05 2001 From: UcfRentLuvr at cs.com (UcfRentLuvr at cs.com) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:11:05 -0500 Subject: Rowling's muggles Message-ID: <387B7F70.7991BFD1.52A758FC@cs.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31002 1. That couple (I forget the name) that visit the Dursleys - stupid and awful.>> They were the Masons. 3. Creevey Sr. - what was his job again? I suppose he must have been nice to produce two kids like Colin and Dennis.>>> He was a milkman I believe. ***Dixie Malfoy*** From amyt at io.com Thu Dec 6 21:03:36 2001 From: amyt at io.com (Amy Tucker) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:03:36 -0600 Subject: Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students Message-ID: <034301c17e99$79350b20$0301a8c0@Domain> No: HPFGUIDX 31003 >As I was reading "Goblet of Fire" earlier on, I realized that there > is no mention whatsoever of any of the Beauxbatons or Durmstrang > students attending a class. Yeah, I noticed that, too. I had assumed that they were taking classes with the Hogwarts kids, and just weren't in any of the main three's classes. This ship isn't really much of an issue, I think, as the lake is HUGE in my imagination. (I mean, how could it not be to happily house a giant squid?) On thing that's always bugged me about Hogwarts, though, is this: How is it that the kids are taught nothing but magic and Quidditch, things like Literature, Mathematics, Science, et al, are left out entirely? Surely people in the wizarding world read and do math from time to time? Are kids just expected to know this stuff when they get there? And if so, how could they possibly read the classics by age 11? Are wizards just ignorant of such things? That seems like an terribly limited existence, and not a very practical one to boot. Any one have any theories? From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Thu Dec 6 21:39:48 2001 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 16:39:48 EST Subject: Magical room Message-ID: <181.4c9c80.29413fa4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31004 In a message dated 12/6/01 4:25:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, frances at forever.u-net.com writes: > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? The first idea that comes to my mind is the room behind the staff table Harry goes into with the other champions. Or maybe it could even be the kitchen. I'm not too sure about the 'magical properties' though.Were there any other new rooms mentioned? I've forgotten. ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gwynyth at drizzle.com Thu Dec 6 22:10:22 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:10:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Certain rooms (was Re: [HPforGrownups] (unknown) In-Reply-To: <9uonka+hsfk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31005 On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, cloud_walkinguk wrote: > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? My guess would be the prefect's bathroom - it sounded very intriguing from the little bit of description, and like there *should* be something more about it than has thus far been mentioned. -Jenett From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu Dec 6 22:23:20 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:23:20 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> References: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <17763772797.20011206142320@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31006 Thursday, December 06, 2001, 1:41:06 PM, lucky_kari wrote: l> Here's a list of Muggles mentioned in the stories l> ... l> 4. Harry's classmates - a)Dudley's gang including Piers Polkiss - l> horrible brats, b) the others - cowards who wouldn't go near Harry Typical schoolkids. l> 7. Lily's parents (mentioned by Petunia) - really enthusiastic to l> have a witch in the family I imagine Lily's parents to have been dreamers, believers in fairies. The kind of Muggles that I think frequently spawns the Muggle-borns. l> 2. The Grangers - very nice, rendered rather justly nervous about the l> wizarding world. Especially with Lucius there. l> 3. Creevey Sr. - what was his job again? Isn't he a milkman? (Being a Wizard probably a bit more lucretive.) l> 2. The Villagers - Rather prejudiced and gossippy So are many Wizards, or else "that Skeeter woman" would be out of business. l> 4. The Smeltings School Nurse - Recognized the fact that Dudley l> needed help! And other Smeltings employees apparently complained about Dudley's bullying, which is more than my teachers ever did. l> If you feel bad about him, like me, remember he probably woke next l> day to find he was a VERY rich man. :) -- Dave (Whose grammar school's favorite pastime was called "David hunting") From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu Dec 6 22:28:39 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:28:39 -0800 Subject: Villians just want to have fun (was: Snape, Harry vs. V, Fudge, photos, knitting) In-Reply-To: <94.1e365562.294142c6@aol.com> References: <94.1e365562.294142c6@aol.com> Message-ID: <12264092292.20011206142839@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31007 Thursday, December 06, 2001, 1:53:10 PM, IAmLordCassandra at aol.com wrote: Iac> Perhaps I should have been more clear with that. I meant he was being noble Iac> in a teasing sort of way. Observing the rules of dueling-the bowing, etc. He Iac> was showing mock respect, IMO. I agree -- This sort of behavior in baddies goes back to the Nome King in _Ozma of Oz_. ("But it's more *fun* doing it this way!") And of course it backfires into their sneering faces every time. -- Dave From fordpr1020 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 22:24:39 2001 From: fordpr1020 at aol.com (thefortressiserlohn) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 22:24:39 -0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uor77+sdik@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31008 Eileen Wrote: > > We have Lupin to show us that not all werewolves are bad, Hagrid > and Madame > > Maxime promote the nicer side of giants the muggles need someone > too! > > > > Anyone agree, or am I all by myself here? > > I agree. We should start a club. Can anyone think of an acronym? Hmmmm..... JAM - Jolly Appreciation of Muggles? WAM - Wizard Appreciating Muggles? LAMP - Love All Muggles Properly? Just my 2 Knutes --jc From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Thu Dec 6 22:32:26 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:32:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Commandments; Christianity of HP Message-ID: <200112062232.RAA18815@gaea.East.Sun.COM> No: HPFGUIDX 31009 Dave did me the honor of a thorough analysis of my post, just when I thought interest had peaked quite low. Thanks, Dave. Overall, I note that Dave interprets the commandments more broadly than I do, e.g. counting the mirror as a graven image. I have no problem with this, it's just a general comment. Here are a few followup remarks: > > > 4 - Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. > > > > Again, perhaps they do, and Rowling simply doesn't mention it. > > True - but the themes of slavery and freedom, intimately related to > the concept of Sabbath rest are there in force. Does Dobby get days > off from Malfoy? Dumbledore explicitly recognises the importance of > holiday for him. Dumbledore's own desire for socks suggests that he > is not driven by his life's work - he drives it. Good point! I had forgotten about Dobby's holidays (probably because I don't own a copy of GoF yet, so I've read it the fewest times of all the books. This is a much stronger inclusion than I had thought. > > > > 5 - Honor your father and your mother... > > > > I think it's clear that Harry honors the memory of his parents. > > Yes, and the rightness of this in the Potterverse is reinforced by > the whole Patronus sequence. Also, Voldemort and Crouch Jr. despise > their parents. This despising by the villains is a good point, as well. > > > > 6 - You shall not kill. > > > > Not only doesn't Harry kill anyone, but he stops Black and Lupin > from killing > > someone whom he has every reason to despise. > > and Dumbledore endorses the value of Pettigrew's life. Also very worth including in any future drafts. > > > 7 - You shall not commit adultery. > > > > Well, all the kids are a bit young for this, I guess (and we don't > know if any > > of the staff are married). Certainly nothing is mentioned in the > texts. > > True - but the whole Yule Ball sequence does hint at the pain and > disorder caused by being careless of the affections of others - think > how Parvati and Padma react, for example. Parvati's later boasting > in a CoMC class suggests she is upset for more than one evening. > > You're right. This is more of an example than I had realized. > > 9 - You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. > > > Uncovering the truth about slandered characters (Hagrid, Sirius) is a > major theme for two of the books. It applies to a lesser extent to > Bertha Jorkins, Snape, Lupin, Harry's parents (remember that car > crash?) and, I'm sure, others. Good catch! This is very relevant to the literal meaning of this commandment. > > > > 10 - You shall not covet [other people's stuff] > > > > I think the only thing Harry has seriously coveted was the > Firebolt, and he > > seemed to get over it (even before Sirius sent him one). Arguably, > he covets Ron's family-- but he doesn't want > > to take anything away from Ron, either, so I'm not sure that counts. > > > It does count if it destroys Harry - as the mirror would have done, > or if Harry tries to take more affection from the Weasleys than they > are prepared to give. Dudley is an example of covetousness run > riot. So, too, really, is Voldemort in his all-consuming quest for > immortality. Amos Diggory is an intriguing lesser example. > Trelawney, Lockhart, Skeeter, and Snape all covet recognition - only > Snape resists the temptation, just. Notice that although they don't > want to take anything material from others, their covetousness has > stolen a sense of reality from Parvati and Lavender, memories from > innocent Armenian warlocks, DADA knowledge from 2nd year Gryffindors, > Harry's, Hermione's, and Hagrid's reputation, and a whole load of > peace of mind from all sorts of people. > These are great examples. Overall, I'd say my first pass at this didn't cover the "bad examples" nearly as well as you've done here. I focused more on the "good" behavior of the protagonists, though I did mention the antagonists a time or two. But it makes much more sense to go both ways on this. > I would say that HP is suffused with Judeo-Christian morality - as is > much British culture. However, distinctively Christian messages are > not there, in my opinion. In particular, the ultimate good is > not 'love God' but 'to thine own self be true', and no outside source > ('salvation') is required to live up to that good - I call that > humanism, FWIW. > As I pointed out in my original post, the Ten Commandments are Old Testament, and as such, wouldn't convey this message in any case. I think it would be worthwhile to do an analysis from the perspective of the Sermon on the Mount (e.g. "Blessed are the Peacemakers," etc.), but I don't have the spare cycles right now. Heck, I'd like to do an analysis from the Eightfold Path (a Buddhist text), but I don't have time for that, either. You are probably right in characterizing the books as humanist, and I would certainly never claim they are particularly Christian (or Buddhist, or any other religion). I do think the message is stronger than 'to thine own self be true', though. That rule would be good enough for Voldemort. HP goes past the Wiccan Rede ("Harm None"), at least as far as the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you), and probably even to "love thy neighbor as thyself." Which, if I recall, has some significance in Christianity. Elizabeth From frances at forever.u-net.com Thu Dec 6 22:48:05 2001 From: frances at forever.u-net.com (cloud_walkinguk) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 22:48:05 -0000 Subject: Certain rooms (JKR Comic Relief interview) Message-ID: <9uosj5+bmj6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31010 While checking out the JRK Comic Relief interview to confirm something for a story I came across the following question: Isaac: If you could travel to Hogwarts for an hour, what would you do there? JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? Frances PS This is a repost as I forgot to put a subject reference. Sorry everyone! Celebrate Harry's and Draco's 21st birthdays: http://www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Frances_Potter/Coming_Of_Age/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_comingofage From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 6 22:57:34 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 22:57:34 -0000 Subject: Commandments; Christianity of HP In-Reply-To: <200112062232.RAA18815@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9uot4u+ied9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31011 > I think > it would be worthwhile to do an analysis from the perspective of the > Sermon on the Mount (e.g. "Blessed are the Peacemakers," etc.), but I > don't have the spare cycles right now. Heck, I'd like to do an analysis > from the Eightfold Path (a Buddhist text), but I don't have time for that, > either. All right, here is the Beatitudes' precepts applied to Harry Potter. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Poor in spirit I've always taken to mean as not too attached to material things. And we see a lot of this in Harry Potter. Ron tells Harry in GoF, I believe, that his father hasn't taken a highly paid job, because of the non-monetary value of current one. To Fudge, on the other hand, money is everything, and Lucius Malfoy becomes important because he has it. Then, there is Dudley and the rest of the Dursleys, completely tied to their car, Dudley's birthday presents etc. Harry has a lot of money, but he isn't too attached to it. In fact, he gives away his winnings in GoF. "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted." Harry himself, I think, comes in here, mourning for his parents. Also Winky, I hope, and Neville. "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." Neville? Winky? The story's not finished enough to find out if they are rewarded. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. "The Parting of the Ways" distinguishes those who do, from those who don't. "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Harry spares Pettigrew. We don't know yet what the result will be, but I think it's safe to say that it will benefit Harry. (see Dumbledore's discussion of Harry's deed) "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Harry is definitely pure in heart, as evidenced by his seeing the philosopher's stone not for his own desires in PS/SS. Cedric Diggory is almost exactly described in these terms by Dumbledore at the closing feast. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." Although our heroes are going to war, the theme of peacemaking is very strong in HP. Dumbledore is the great peacemaker, bringing even Sirius and Snape together at the end of GoF. He's seeking to heal the rift between the Muggle and Wizarding worlds, between giants and people etc. "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." We haven't seen many people "persecuted for righteousness' sake" yet. But we will next book, I'm sure, and it's happened before. Remember the Potters and Longbottoms. "Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account." This fits Harry to a tee. The process of reviling Harry for his refusal to submit to Crouch's lie has already begun. Rita Skeeter has "uttered all kinds of evil" against him, and now that he's defied the Ministry, more people are going to. Eileen From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Thu Dec 6 23:00:04 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:00:04 -0000 Subject: Correction of my postRe: Commandments; Christianity of HP In-Reply-To: <9uot4u+ied9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uot9k+3fl3@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31012 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: >The process of reviling Harry for his > refusal to submit to Crouch's lie has already begun. Fudge's lie, of course. :) Eileen From scmacdonald at carlson.com Thu Dec 6 23:08:36 2001 From: scmacdonald at carlson.com (scot_macdonald) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:08:36 -0000 Subject: certain rooms Message-ID: <9uotpk+r4qh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31013 My vote is for the room off the great hall were the champions gathered... lots of talking portraits... and perhaps the reason the champions went in there is because the room imbues a sort of protection on those that pass through it... just an idea. I always found it curious that one of the paintings, Violet, I believe was her name, went to visit the fat lady to inform her that Harry was choosen by the goblet. From clio at unicum.de Fri Dec 7 00:26:51 2001 From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 00:26:51 -0000 Subject: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9un1rn+drt6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9up2cb+9vej@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31014 Wow, what a great theory, Heather. I like the idea of Snape being kind of a reluctant guardian of Harry.It would explain his attitude towards him without needing the James-life-depth background, which after all was not considererd important by the movie makers. I think you got close to the core of things, but we are not quite there yet. But I have the gut feeling Snape is deeply involved into the events in 1981. I just can't put my finger onto it. Being a fanatic nitpicker and having the events of that night pondered over and over again, too, I still have some questions. 1. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > Was this one of the Evans family homes, then? Lily being Muggle- born, its much more unlikely that any of the Death Eaters would have known anything about any of her childhood houses prior to Peter's revelation. The magic-related destruction of one of the Evans houses > would have just driven Petunia over the edge. It's a nice idea that the Potters were hiding in a summer house of the Evans family. It is highly unlikely that the Evans (muggles, as far as we know)owned a house in a place named Godric's Hollow. The name stringly suggests a connection to the Godric Gryffindor-heir of Gryffindor issue. 2. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > Hagrid half-sorrowfully, half-bewilderedly does what he was asked to do: he retrieves the baby and refuses to give him to Sirius. It isn't clear that he has any idea *why* Sirius has to be snubbed like this, but Hagrid is loyal to Dumbledore. Depressed and enraged by Peter's betrayal and the deaths of his dear friends, blaming himself to a degree, Sirius hands off his motorcycle (what would appear to be a typical pre-suicide move) to Hagrid and sets off to settle the score with Peter. He probably expects to die in the encounter. After delivering the baby to Privet Drive Hagrid says he now will return the bike to Sirius. Why is he oblivious of Sirius blasting Peter Pettigrew and being in jail? And if he doesn't know, why doesn't Dumbledore tell him? And why didn't Hagrid return the bike earlier, if he really has spend a full day in Hogwarts? 3. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > But before the Muggles can arrive, first Hagrid, and then Sirius, both turn up. Hagrid has to have been told by Dumbledore where to go. Due to the last-minute nature of the SK Switch, Sirius may well have been the one person outside of the charm who knew where the Potters were. Hagrid might have Apperated in, but Sirius is of course on his flying motorcycle. As we see with the flying Ford in CS, these enchanted vehicles aren't bullet-train fast. Sirius must have taken a little bit of time in getting there. (How he knew to come? Did Peter draw Sirius out, intending to kill him later in the day?) > > > The fact that they arrive too late to get the Potters away, but before the Muggles arrive, suggests to me that someone in Dumbledore's circle (probably D himself) received another, last- minute warning from Snape, who was able to tell D(?) where (Godric's Hollow!) and when (*tonight*). Dumbledore sends Hagrid to the destroyed house. If Dumbledore got a warning in time, why did he not send a more powerful wizard there. No offense to Hagrid, but he doesn't legally own a wand. Did Dumbledore knew Hagrid would come to late to save the Potters? How? wasn't it dangerous to send Hagrid there alone? I mean it was possible that a Death Eater or Voldemort himself was still lurking in the house. Its a remarkable slim window in time between the destruction of Voldemort and the arrivel of the first muggles or MoM officials in the street.How come that Hagrid arrives exactely in that time? And how does Sirius know when to go there? He was still thought off as the secret-keeper. Surly dumbledore would not send the secret-keeper to the place he was supposed to keep secret in a moment where this secret was in danger. 4. --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: >In the morning, soon after being so evasive with McGonagall and being certain she has left, Hagrid comes to get Harry and put him down for a nap for an hour or two before setting off on Sirius' flying motorcycle for Surrey. Hagrid states that baby Harry fell asleep over Bristol when they travelled to Little Whinging. Would he really fly over Bristol if he would go straight from Scotland to Surrey? (I'm not that familiar with English topography.) If baby Harry spent the missing 24 h in Hogwarts, why does not Dumbledore take him to Privet Drive himself? There are a lot of questions about the timing when the Godric's Hollow incident is concerned. IMHO they literally meddeled with the time. A time-turner! What if Dumbledore sent Hagrid back into the past to retrieve baby Harry, like people have already suggested? Does it make sense? I'm going to try to explain this a little more. Maybe after the (for all 3 Potters lethal) raid Dumbledore found a way to keep Harry alive. So he reached out to Lily in the past and told her how to save her baby. Or Maybe he sent someone into the past, a mysterious person x, who helped to protect Harry in that night. Than of course it was not only Lily's love that protected Harry. With the knowledge of what would happen (because it already had happened) it was easy to send Hagrid to Godric's Hollow in the exact time to fetch Harry. The journey with the bike Hagrid and Harry made would then not only be a journey through space, but also through time. THis theory is supported by the strange watch Dumbledore uses when waiting in Privet Drive. Quote PS, Chapter 1: "Dumbledore gave a great sniff as he took a golden watch from his pocket and examined it. It was a very odd watch. It had twelve hands but no numbers; instead, little planets were moving around the edge. It must have made sense to Dumbledore, though, because he put it back in his pocket and said, "Hagrid's late. I suppose it was he who told you I'd be here, by the way?" " Maybe this watch doesn't tell the time, but, well different levels of time. I, know time travel seems to be a little far fetched, but we have seen wziards travelling in space without effort. Why not travel in time? Clio, who wanted to say so much more, but cant think of it right now. From sonjahric at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 01:15:37 2001 From: sonjahric at yahoo.com (sonjahric) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 01:15:37 -0000 Subject: Certain rooms (JKR Comic Relief interview) In-Reply-To: <9uosj5+bmj6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9up57p+g36j@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31015 I think it is the prefect's bathroom, or maybe the room with the chamber pots that Dumbledore found at night. > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Thu Dec 6 22:57:28 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:57:28 EST Subject: HPforGrownups] Magical room I have a guess Message-ID: <12b.8a8547c.294151d8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31016 Cassie writes: > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? The first idea that comes to my mind is the room behind the staff table Harry goes into with the other champions. Or maybe it could even be the kitchen. I'm not too sure about the 'magical properties' though.Were there any other new rooms mentioned? I've forgotten. What about the room with the chamber pots? Dumbledore finds it and we hear about it at the Yule Ball I guess. Jo-Jo [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sonjahric at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 01:43:40 2001 From: sonjahric at yahoo.com (sonjahric) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 01:43:40 -0000 Subject: Origin of Harry's powers / ways to kill a wizard Message-ID: <9up6sc+guuc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31017 1. Recently, several members speculated that Harry might have received all of his powers from Voldemort (that Harry might have been a squib) I disagree. In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - Keeper of the Keys, Hagrid said, "Stop Lily an' James Potter's son goin' ter Howarts! Yer mad. His name's been down ever since he was born." This obviously proves that Harry was born with the powers that he has. (Just my opinion: I believe that Harry was prophesized to be a great and powerful wizard that would eventually take down Voldemort and Voldemort went to kill Harry and not his parents.) 2. Several members also recently discussed the ways (other than Avada Kedavra) to kill a wizard. Someone said that besides the usual ways (normal ways to kill muggles) there are probably other magical ways. (Implying that wizards can die from the same things that kill muggles.) In most circumstances, I do not believe that a wizard can die in the "usual" way. In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - Keeper of the Keys, Hagrid said, "'CAR CRASH!' roared Hagrid, . . . 'How could a car crash kill Lily an' James Potter? It's an outrage! A scandal!'" This is assuming that what Hagrid says is accurate, but I believe it is. Sorry I didn't post a few days ago when this was discussed, but every time I go to post, for some reason my modem disconnects. Maybe Peeves is terrorizing me! From eepeters at midway.uchicago.edu Fri Dec 7 02:05:23 2001 From: eepeters at midway.uchicago.edu (eep17eep17) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 02:05:23 -0000 Subject: time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" In-Reply-To: <9up2cb+9vej@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9up853+ri3i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31018 in Regard to "Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981" "clio44a" wrote: > There are a lot of questions about the timing when the Godric's > Hollow incident is concerned. > IMHO they literally meddeled with the time. A time-turner! > What if Dumbledore sent Hagrid back into the past to retrieve baby > Harry, like people have already suggested? > ... > The journey with the bike Hagrid and Harry made would then not only > be a journey through space, but also through time. > THis theory is supported by the strange watch Dumbledore uses when > waiting in Privet Drive. > ... > I, know time travel seems to be a little far fetched, but we have > seen wziards travelling in space without effort. Why not travel in > time? Certainly makes sense, but I'm of the opinion that one needs to be very, VERY careful when invoking time travel (to tell the truth, I was a little dissapointed in JKR for using such a cheap solution). For basically this reason: it's too powerful and too easy and there's no way to explain why it's not used, well, all the time. For instance: if it's okay to use a time-turner to save Sirius in PoA, why can't they use one to save Cedric in GoF? And, if it's okay to use a time turner to save Harry on Nov. 1, 1981, why not also save James and Lily? Finally: if there really is a way to change the past, why hasn't Voldemort won already? He wouldn't be ruled by any of the compunctions that would keep the good wizards from messing with the past. For instance: why doesn't he just keep going back in time over and over until there's an army of about 1000 of him? Actually this leads to a question that I've been pondering for a while. JKR has mentioned in interviews that there are very specific rules that the magical universe follows. Not laws in the legal sense, but laws in the isaac-newton-physical-laws sense. Anyone care to speculate what "the rules" are, particularly in regard to time travel? I had a couple thoughts: 1) "Miss Granger, you know the law -- you know what is at stake ... YOU - MUST - NOT - BE - SEEN" - Dumbledore, PoA. Perhaps someting peculiar happens if what I'll call "self #1" and "self #2" are seen together? like, I don't know, they explode or some such? I know, I know, this doesn't explain why Harry #2 is seen by Harry #1, except that Harry #1 doesn't think it's him, he thinks it's his father. 2) Finite magic: Maybe, if a person lives 2 hours twice, each self is only half as powerful during that time. perhaps Harry #1 can't conjure the patronus by himself, but only with the help of Harry #2, because the person's magical ... watchamacall it? energy? juice? is cut in half during that time. 3) Limitations: maybe moving back in time more than a couple hours requires incredible energy. Maybe this is true for apparating, too (e.g., why don't wizards take vacations, I don't know, on the moon? Not that we know for sure they don't, but I suspect . . .) Still, I could see Voldemort being able to do a lot with a couple extra hours. Any other thoughts? Any ideas what the other "rules" of this universe are? not just relating to time-turners, but, well, everything. -EEP Who is still wondering how Hermione ate and slept her 3rd year, if she was only going to use a time turner for her studies, and why she didn't look 3 years older at the end of that book, although that would expain the whole Krum things (he's 17. she's 14. eww.) From vencloviene at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 02:09:26 2001 From: vencloviene at hotmail.com (anavenc) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 02:09:26 -0000 Subject: Snape as Harry's protector (Was: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9un1rn+drt6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9up8cm+mm57@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31019 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > It doesn't matter whether the prophecy is objectively accurate: Voldemort is after Harry again, Severus is magically bound to help protect him. An interesting theory, Heather. I also suspect that Snape might be one of Harry's guardians. In one of the books Harry, pondering on Snape's nasty attitude, has a sarcastic thought that Snape is less likely to do something nice(?) (can't remember what) than "adopt Harry". Maybe, this phrase of Snape adopting Harry is a hint of a magical bond between these two which might be revealed in the later books. I have one question, though. Why the role of Snape as Harry's protector is not revealed to Harry by, say, Dumbledore ? I know, it is a great plot device. :) But apart from that? Throughout all four books Harry and Snape continue to misunderstand each other, in GoF with fatal consequences. Had Harry trusted Snape instead of the fake Moody, had he told Snape whom he had seen in Snape's office, Crouch Jr. probably would have been caught in time, Voldemort would not have risen again and Cedric would not have died. :( So, why Dumbledore let all that happen? Clearly, Snape's mission as Harry's protector must have been kept secret because of different reasons, (one of them--Snape possibly being a spy with DE?), but it seems that Harry not knowing about Snape being his guardian undermined Snape's efforts to save Harry to great extent. When I think of all the times Snape turned up when Harry was up to some rule-breaking, I can imagine Snape's frustration: difficult to protect somebody, who always sneaks down forbidden coridors, runs away to Hogsmeade using secret passages, always is at a wrong place at a wrong time, always seems to be plotting something and generally attracts all kinds of trouble. Maybe Snape's infamous threat to feed Harry Veritasserum is the cry of desperation: I NEED to know what you are up to, so that I could get some control of the situation. Of course, Harry's mistrust of Snape is the result of Snape's nasty classroom attitude. It was ruthlessly provoked by Snape at their very first meeting. Why, I wonder, Snape chose to alienate Harry ? If he is indeed Harry' guardian, he just brought much trouble on himself. Any thoughts? Ana. From djdwjt at aol.com Fri Dec 7 02:25:00 2001 From: djdwjt at aol.com (hermione1956) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 02:25:00 -0000 Subject: The Room With Magical Properties In-Reply-To: <9uopqj+9pse@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9up99s+r41i@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31020 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "supergirl1024" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cloud_walkinguk" wrote: > > > > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which > has > > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > > > > > > I believe Dumbledore mentions finding a bathroom he had never seen before and speculating that perhaps he had never seen it before because it could only be found, for example (i) at a certain time of day, or (ii) when the seeker had a full bladder. I think it's towards the end of the book. This room would seem the most logical candidate. From idouright2 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 02:28:48 2001 From: idouright2 at aol.com (idouright2 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:28:48 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] (unknown) Message-ID: <180.49d97b.29418360@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31021 In a message dated 12/6/2001 1:25:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, frances at forever.u-net.com writes: > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > > > Frances > I Think it could be the room Dumbledore mentions that he found when he needed to use the bath room. When the champions first sit at the table and Karkanoff asks some question Dumbledore makes the comment about a room that he walked in the night before and then when he went to look for it again it was gone...If I had the book I would quote it...sorry! I hope it was some help though -step [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Fri Dec 7 02:24:02 2001 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:24:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" Message-ID: <67.1e1f4ae8.29418242@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31022 In a message dated 12/6/01 9:12:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, eepeters at midway.uchicago.edu writes: > 1) "Miss Granger, you know the law -- you know what is at stake ... > YOU - MUST - NOT - BE - SEEN" - Dumbledore, PoA. Sorry if someone's already brought this up-but it wasn't the easiest thing to search for so I'm taking a chance here. I noticed that in the Shreiking Shack Snape tells them all that he saw them on the marauder's map. During the second time, when Hermione and Harry use the time turner, wouldn't Snape see the extra Harry and Hermione? ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From neilward at dircon.co.uk Fri Dec 7 03:25:25 2001 From: neilward at dircon.co.uk (Neil Ward) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 03:25:25 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Check yer titles! Message-ID: <012e01c17ece$cff53180$4a3370c2@c5s910j> No: HPFGUIDX 31023 Hi everyone, This is a wee reminder to check the titles of your posts before hitting send. **If a thread has drifted from the gleam in Dumbledore's eye to the symbolism embodied by socks, the title should reflect that. If it's transitional it could say, for example: "How about those socks? (was re: Dumbledore's gleam of triumph)". **If you are receiving Digests, please remember to change the heading from re: Digest #666 to "Lily's eye colour" or whatever when responding to one of the posts. **If you are initiating a thread (or what you hope will be a thread and not a post of great insight that dies on its uppers), remember to check that you actually *have* a title. If someone else forgets (hey, we're all human... well, most of us), please don't continue the journey into the "[unknown]" when responding - stick in a title. **If you are combining several shorter responses, please note each topic briefly in the title, e.g. "Lily's eyes - Dumbledore's triumph - Crookshanks' origins". **Remember to use the FF (fanfic) and SHIP (relationshipping) prefixes on titles when appropriate [as noted in our Admin files]. All this might seem obvious, but when people are having to scan scores of messages a day, as most of us are, it really helps if the titles are relevant. Thanks for your cooperation. Magically, Neil Flying Ford Anglia Magical Moderators Questions?: magicalmods at yahoogroups.com From rosiewolf at hargray.com Fri Dec 7 03:39:25 2001 From: rosiewolf at hargray.com (rosiewolf) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 03:39:25 -0000 Subject: Snape as Harry's protector (Was: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9up8cm+mm57@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9updld+kbbp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31024 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "anavenc" wrote: > Of course, Harry's mistrust of Snape is the result of Snape's nasty > classroom attitude. It was ruthlessly provoked by Snape at their very > first meeting. Why, I wonder, Snape chose to alienate Harry ? If he > is indeed Harry' guardian, he just brought much trouble on himself. Perhaps it is more important to the "big picture" that Snape's nasty attitude towards Harry get back to the DEs. They have a very effective little spy in that classroom in the person of Draco Malfoy who can be trusted to report everything back to Daddy. Both Crabbe and Goyle could also be trusted to back up any tales told on Snape. The walls indeed have ears at Hogwarts which could also explain why Dumbledore doesn't let Harry in on Snape's role of protector. Rosiewolf From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 04:16:13 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:16:13 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Room With Magical Properties In-Reply-To: <9up99s+r41i@eGroups.com> References: <9up99s+r41i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <14484949103.20011206201613@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31025 Thursday, December 06, 2001, 6:25:00 PM, hermione1956 wrote: h> I believe Dumbledore mentions finding a bathroom he had never h> seen before and speculating that perhaps he had never seen it before h> because it could only be found, for example (i) at a certain time of h> day, or (ii) when the seeker had a full bladder. I think it's h> towards the end of the book. This room would seem the most logical h> candidate. Assuming the room exists and isn't one of Albus' "shaggy sock stories"... :) Personally my knuts are on the Prefect's bathroom. -- Dave From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 04:21:01 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:21:01 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" In-Reply-To: <9up853+ri3i@eGroups.com> References: <9up853+ri3i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <16885237278.20011206202101@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31026 Thursday, December 06, 2001, 6:05:23 PM, eep17eep17 wrote: e> 1) "Miss Granger, you know the law -- you know what is at stake ... e> YOU - MUST - NOT - BE - SEEN" - Dumbledore, PoA. I think this is more a Ministry Law than a law od nature, because they *are* seen. Harry is seen by his past self... And someone else. Extra brownie points for naming the other individual who seems them. :) -- Dave From hp_lexicon at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 04:31:17 2001 From: hp_lexicon at yahoo.com (hp_lexicon) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 04:31:17 -0000 Subject: time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" In-Reply-To: <16885237278.20011206202101@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <9upgml+l4nf@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31027 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > I think this is more a Ministry Law than a law od nature, because they > *are* seen. Harry is seen by his past self... And someone else. > Extra brownie points for naming the other individual who seems them. Hmmm...I know that they HEAR themselves going by the broom closet. But who else sees them... I'm tempted to open the book and find out, but that would be cheating... I agree that it's more than a law of the MOM. It's bigger than that. There's just too much at stake when you time travel. I have toyed with the idea of a time-travel trick to the whole overarching plot, what with the ancestor/descendent question and the difficulty in rectifying some parts of the stories to the timeline. But I agree with someone upthread who said that (and I paraphrase) the whole time travel plot device is just too easy and raises way too many questions. Nothing is permanent if you can travel through time, not even death, and another of JKR's rules of magic is that you can't raise someone from the dead, ghosts notwithstanding. I have no doubt that JKR will surprise us over and over in the next few books. Hopefully it won't be with a time travel plot again. Steve From jcarella at optonline.net Fri Dec 7 04:54:51 2001 From: jcarella at optonline.net (Justine) Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:54:51 -0500 Subject: Weasley home hidden (was: Who Will Die?) References: <9um3t8+oh94@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <00a401c17edb$4e6712c0$4a59bf18@default> No: HPFGUIDX 31028 ----- Original Message ----- >> --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: >> The Burrow is somehow hidden. >>snip >>Any other thoughts? There is mention in either PoA or CoS about the field where Ron and his brothers practice Quidditch at home being hidden behind a barn or shielded from the neighbors' view by an orchard or something... Sorry, I can't recall the exact reference. Surely they wouldn't be need to be concerned about their practice area being well concealed by a building if it were magically hidden? Justine From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 05:14:02 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 05:14:02 -0000 Subject: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9up2cb+9vej@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9upj6q+b4pa@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31029 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "clio44a" wrote: > Wow, what a great theory, Heather. > I like the idea of Snape being kind of a reluctant guardian of > Harry.It would explain his attitude towards him without needing the > James-life-depth background, which after all was not considererd > important by the movie makers. > I think you got close to the core of things, but we are not quite > there yet. But I have the gut feeling Snape is deeply involved into > the events in 1981. I just can't put my finger onto it. > > Being a fanatic nitpicker and having the events of that night > pondered over and over again, too, I still have some questions. > > 1. > It's a nice idea that the Potters were hiding in a summer house of > the Evans family. It is highly unlikely that the Evans (muggles, as > far as we know)owned a house in a place named Godric's Hollow. The > name stringly suggests a connection to the Godric Gryffindor-heir of > Gryffindor issue. Well, that's unless you allow the possibility that the Evans family were *also* descended from Godric Gryffindor, in a branch which had gone squib and fallen out of the record-keeping some generations before. It's consistent with LV's late interest in destroying the Potters if you follow the line that the Heir of Gryffindor was more likely to have come from a *double* line of descent, and especially if you surmise that the 'Phoenix' is a feature of the prophecy, rather than just a reference to Fawkes's butt. > > > 2. > > After delivering the baby to Privet Drive Hagrid says he now will > return the bike to Sirius. > Why is he oblivious of Sirius blasting Peter Pettigrew and being in > jail? And if he doesn't know, why doesn't Dumbledore tell him? And > why didn't Hagrid return the bike earlier, if he really has spend a > full day in Hogwarts? > I would suggest here that Dumbledore may well realize that some dangerous times are still to come in the next several days, as the Death Eaters run amok looking for answers without LV to direct and organize them. So if Hagrid doesn't know about the Pettigrew/Black incident simply because he has been sleeping or en route to Surrey much of the day, Dumbledore may not regard this as need-to-know information for Hagrid to complete his task yet. For that matter, though, I'm not sure I recall us ever hearing exactly when the word of that incident hit the wizarding public. Is it possible that even Dumbledore didn't know about it until after Harry had been taken to the Dursleys? > 3. > > Dumbledore sends Hagrid to the destroyed house. If Dumbledore got a > warning in time, why did he not send a more powerful wizard there. > No offense to Hagrid, but he doesn't legally own a wand. Did > Dumbledore knew Hagrid would come to late to save the Potters? How? > wasn't it dangerous to send Hagrid there alone? I mean it was > possible that a Death Eater or Voldemort himself was still lurking in > the house. This is a sticky point for me as well, but I am wondering if the Death Eaters' Dark Marks acted wonky when Voldemort's body was destroyed, as they did when he was gaining more substance back on the physical plane again. If Snape had gone personally to DUmbledore, he may have been able to know from this that Voldemort was disrupted. > Its a remarkable slim window in time between the destruction of > Voldemort and the arrivel of the first muggles or MoM officials in > the street.How come that Hagrid arrives exactely in that time? And > how does Sirius know when to go there? He was still thought off as > the secret-keeper. Surly dumbledore would not > send the secret-keeper to the place he was supposed to keep secret in > a moment where this secret was in danger. > Ah, I've remembered Sirius' motives now: he had been due to check up on Peter in Peter's hidey-hole that night. When he arrived, he found Peter gone so we rushed to the Potters' house. It would appear to be a coincidence that he arrived on Hagrid's heels. That sequence: a) reveals how little information Hagrid actually had about the issues, and b) accounts for Sirius' horrible lapse in judgement by allowing him to see the destruction firsthand and to be denied his "right" to care for the orphaned baby. > 4. > > Hagrid states that baby Harry fell asleep over Bristol when they > travelled to Little Whinging. > Would he really fly over Bristol if he would go straight from > Scotland to Surrey? (I'm not that familiar with English topography.) I wasn't really clear with my post here: I'm not sure whether Hagrid dropped off the baby with Dumbledore at Hogwarts or in some bolthole somewhere else. I am assuming that Hagrid had his morning conversation with McGonagall at the school, but nothing stops him from having FLOOed to and fro somewhere else. > If baby Harry spent the missing 24 h in Hogwarts, why does not > Dumbledore take him to Privet Drive himself? Perhaps its too risky to Apperate an infant. Besides, Dumbledore had to go early to prep the area with the Put-outer before the baby got there. This is a theory that deserves further exploration, but at the moment I'm a little skeptical simply because one would think Dumbledore would have time-turned a whole hit squad to the house to be there when LV arrived. > Clio, > who wanted to say so much more, but cant think of it right now. From sparkledtongue at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 05:33:06 2001 From: sparkledtongue at yahoo.com (Jessica Powell) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:33:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bloody Baron and Peeves In-Reply-To: <17763772797.20011206142320@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20011207053306.4312.qmail@web21004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31030 I was reading about ya'lls theories on house elves becoming poltergeists in the hereafter, and was wondering if maybe Peeves was house elf to the Bloody Baron: it is said in SS that Peeves only listens to the Baron. This could support the theories that house elves become troublesome apparitions after death. I could be too far out there to strike any interest, but I am trying! Jess-horrible at reading between the lines! ===== Jessica's Shake'n'Shack __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From taboulica at yahoo.com.au Fri Dec 7 06:35:02 2001 From: taboulica at yahoo.com.au (=?iso-8859-1?q?Tabouli?=) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:35:02 +1100 (EST) Subject: Snape & fame, Myrtle's Bathtime Baptisms, Socking V, Dementor doubts, Christianity in HP, Wizard ethnocentrism, non-mortal spies Message-ID: <20011207063502.47164.qmail@web20403.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31031 (Tabouli reports from a webmail address while her unite account is under repair. Normal service will be resumed as soon as my ISP gets its act together) Emily: > I thnk the very fact that Harry gets to be the big hero is a big source of Snape's resentment of him. Dumbledore himself said that Snape turned spy "at great personal risk" - he put his life on the line every day for over a year trying to fight Voldemort, but at the end of the day, who gets all the glory for defeating him? A fifteen month old baby with no concept of what he actually did. Add in the fact that said fifteen month old baby was the son of your childhood enemy ... yeah, I'd be pretty po'd too.< Welll yes, but is Snape really the glory-huntin type? Im sure he wouldnt turn down an Order of Merlin first class if it were offered, but Im not convinced that being liked and admired is high on Snapes priority list (compare him with Lockhart, for whom this is the most important thing in life!). Hes surly and nasty and bad-tempered (not a great way of winning admirers and friends), he neglects his personal appearance (ditto), and being a spy/double agent/whichever he is is by definition a job where he has to keep a low profile, lest he gets caught or even assasinated by either side. A difficult, dangerous job, but hardly one to win him fame and glory. Respect yes, but hardly glory. How conclusively would you need to win a war for the spy to be safe running around with front page praises and garlands round his neck? step: >Maybe Peeves being a Poltergeist is the essence of a whole bunch of bitter house elves! I mean it could happen! Interesting idea. Though, of course, the Hogwarts house-elves are, by their standards, working under great conditions for a kindly master. And apparently happy. If theres any bitterness there, it must be buried pretty deep Im inclined towards the enslavement of the mind theory for house-elves (though I still have a weakness for the symbiotic relationship with wizards theory). Perhaps what the house-elves really need is a good soak in the best scents, moans and foams David & Myrtle Bathroom Bonanza has to offer to awaken their bubbling inner revolutionaries (Ill let Hermione know). David: > Myrtle is ready to satisfy any taste, no matter how depraved! (Er, Myrtle Moans with the Kissing Dementors, anyone? Only two galleons on video at the Knockturn Alley Nook of Naughtiness) Then theres Auroras Sanctuary-in-a-Sock idea. Now this has promise. Maybe it was the love Lily crocheted into Harrys booties that bounced Voldemorts curse! (Protect your precious pumpkin with Lilys Luxurious Lovewool! Sock it to You-Know-Who!) As for female ghosts, didnt the Wailing Widow come all the way to Hogwarts from Kent for Nicks Deathday Party or something? Mahoney: > When Dumbledore brings up the fact of Voldemort's return, Fudge gets a 'dreamy' sort of look in his eyes. Then he poo-poo's the idea, and all but accuses Harry of being nuts based on Rita Skeeter's story. Hmm, interesting idea. Ive mentioned before that the Imperius curse is due for its moment in the limelight. Surely at some point one of the major characters will succumb, causing all manner of juicy plot twists. Elizabeth: > I suspect there's more to the Dementors' attention toward Harry than I've previously realized Cindy: > They don't lower their hoods, so he doesn't know where they are looking, particularly since they don't even have eyes. You know, I think JKR is a bit inconsistent with Dementor sight. On one hand she argues that theyre blind and can only sense people close up by their emotions. This is how she gets around the whole Sirius in jail and Barty Junior subterfuge stuff. On the other, in PoA Hermione says that the Dementors would have seen Sirius fly into Hogwarts on a broomstick from miles in the air. If Dementors read who someone is by their emotions, why couldnt they tell Barty Junior and his mother apart, Polyjuice or no? And why bother with the Polyjuice except for the benefit of the other prisoners if they cant see? Frankly, if one dying person looks much the same as another to the sightless Dementors, and they cant tell the difference between a man going insane and a large black dog, Im surprised that more people havent escaped from the place using similar tricks. >Cindy (who is still in a bloodthirsty mood and wonders if Moody's >magical eye is really an eye harvested from a dementor) Mahoney: > Um...ew? Yes, definitely ew. (Tabouli wonders whether the bloodthirsty Cindy would be up for some Moaning Myrtles Magical Mad-Eye Moisturising Bubble Bath) More Elizabeth: > I don't think Snape sees the Malfoys for the threat they are. Time to wake up and smell the pumpkin juice, in my mind. Oh no, I think the aroma of pumpkin juice is well and truly lodged in Snapes nostrils where the Malfoys are concerned. Snapes a very very suspicious character, for a start, and he surely knows that Lucius is a Death Eater, and a rich, powerful, clever one. If he missed a threat that obvious, hed never be cunning and crafty enough to play a risky game like spying. I think favouring Draco is much more likely to be a sneaky subterfuge. As for Snape leaving Voldemort before James and Lily died and the reasons therefor (?), those of you who got to the end of my Unauthorised Biography of Severus Snape will have read that one possibility (for the Snape Loved Lily LOLLIPOPS among us), is that Snape himself was asked to kill the Potters, and suddenly realised he couldnt do it(much as he hated James, he knew that killing James would make Lily hate him forever and one day he might be asked to kill her as well, filthy Mudblood that V considers her), and instead fled to Dumbledore to forge a side-swapping spy deal, driving V to storm to Godrics Hollow to do the job himself. Joanne: > And my cynical son pointed out how creepy it would be if Harry could converse with the photos of his parents Ook. Although he did briefly chat with his parents shadows in the graveyard, remember HP and the 10 commandments: > 8 - You shall not steal. Oh, theres quite a bit of stealing going on. Sirius steals food to survive, IIRC, the Trio steal from Snape to make potions, Filch triumphantly accuses Peeves of stealing the egg from a Triwizard champion and thinks this might persuade Dumbledore to eject him (??). In terms of the morality of stealing, JKR seems to be taking, as David says, a humanist sort of line. A sort of yes, stealing is against the rules, but not deeply immoral (like murder), and can therefore be done if the thief has a higher motive in mind, like saving Muggleborns, or staying alive and close to Harry. David: > I would say that HP is suffused with Judeo-Christian morality - as is much British culture. Ah, a pity I missed the beginning of this thread sounds right up the cross-cultural alley I was wandering in a week or so ago about the US and UK and their basically Christian laws and values (regardless of the actual religion or lack of it of UK and US citizens). > In particular, the ultimate good is not 'love God' but 'to thine own self be true', and no outside source ('salvation') is required to live up to that good - I call that humanism, FWIW. Im a bit hazy on the exact philosophical definition of humanism (those 1990 Philosophy lectures were a long time ago), but yes, JKR does seem to have a basically secular humanist values system in her books. Although I think its less a to thine own self be true than Dumbledores comment about it being our choices that determine who we are, and both of these are linked to Protestant individualism. That is, morality is a set of universal laws which define Good and Evil and should be applied to every individual equally (be they family, friend or foe), and it is up to each individual to uphold these laws, with their conscience (or God) as witness, and determine his or her own destiny through personal choice and effort (a la Protestant Work Ethic. Emily: > Does anyone else find themselves somewhat perturbed by the depiction of muggles in Rowlings world? Not me, actually. Just sounds like normal (if not especially admirable) human behaviour to me. The ol my group is superior to all other groups (just measure them by my groups standards!) syndrome, otherwise known as ethnocentrism. Deriding or belittling or otherwise dismissing other groups as stupid or ignorant or primitive (or even a bunch of badly dressed freaks who turn teacups into rats) and so on just the thing to remind ourselves that our group is infinitely better. The Muggles do it to the wizards as well, and felt threatened enough to try to wipe them out. The snootier purebloods do it to the Muggle borns. The human races do it to each other, and so do the human social classes. Human beings have been dehumanising their enemies and competitors for millennia, and the wizards are no different. Gwen: > I myself came up against the portrait/photo theory when I was writing my fanfic, because I needed to be in a place with portraits, but where a portrait couldn't speak to ID my hero (who was a spy). Hey, given how helpful the Fat Lady was when Sirius was lurking, why not have a portrait as a spy?? Maybe Snape was sent to hang a friendly portrait in Riddle House! Actually, come to think of it, why should Snape risk his mortal body spying for Dumbledore when there are all manner of already-dead ghosts wafting about? Are ghosts too wrapped up in their own tragic demises and limited memories to help the living? Magnanimous Myrtle certainly stepped in to lend Harry a hand, so to speak, even if her motives may have been murky Tabouli. http://shopping.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Shopping - Free CDs for thousands of Priority Shoppers! From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it Fri Dec 7 06:58:04 2001 From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (pigwidgeon37) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 06:58:04 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World Message-ID: <9upp9s+44cl@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31032 Hi all, having searched the archive following our admins' instructions, I didn't get any result for the keywords "wizard law" and "wizarding law"- although I don't quite understand it, the topic *was* brought up, I remember it clearly. Desperation reigns. Anyway, I'd like to share a few thoughts on this subject that has been nagging me for quite a long time. Seemingly, the British wizarding community has one single institution that covers most of the many functions of institutions, authorities etc. known and required by the constitution in a democracy. The Minister of Magic and his Heads of Departments correspond to a Muggle Prime Minister/Federal Chancellor and his government. There is a department for International Magical Cooperation (Muggles' Ministry for Foreign Affairs), a Department of Magical Law Enforcement (Ministry of Interior Affairs, Home Office for the Brits) etc.etc. But it seems that the Minister does not only have the duties (and the power) of a Prime Minister, but also those of a president, i.e. for example representing his country toward other countries (thinking of the QWC- Fudge and the Bulgarian MoM). So far, this wouldn't represent a particular problem, but things get a bit more difficult when we turn our attention to the legislative body (parliament), which is blatantly absent. Now, there must be such a thing as magical law, because there is a Magical Law Enforcement (an analogon to Muggle police), and you can't enforce a law that doesn't exist. Throughout the 4 books, the reader only gets glimpses of things forbidden: Hagrid isn't supposed to do magic, because he isn't a fully trained wizard; underage magic outside Hogwarts isn't allowed; to charm Muggle artefacts is a minor offence, but for a ministry employee it has disciplinary consequences and the artefacts are confiscated while the perpetrator is fined; the use of certain curses can get you a life sentence in Azkaban, just to mention a few of those rules that come to my mind without a more thorough research. To say nothing of Dark Magic, for the detection of which there is even a special force within the Ministry, namely the Aurors who could be compared to Muggle Intelligence. And things get downright scary, at least for someone who has grown up in a democracy and sticks to its values, when it comes to jurisdiction: There are no independent courts in the British wizarding world. Not only that, but the person who in Muggle terms would be the Minister of Interior Affairs (Crouch Sr.) acts as judge AND public prosecutor in a trial where life sentences to Azkaban are at stake. Not to mention that the defendants don't even have a lawyer but must defend themselves. Evidently, Montesquieu's thoughts haven't reached the wizarding world. What remains unclear, at least until now, is who *makes* the law- it wouldn't come as a surprise if it was the minister plus the Heads of Departments. OTOH, there are some hints at magical law being more of an international item- like the various regulations concerning magical creatures, for example. Anyway, this doesn't change much, it only poses the same problem on a higher level: Who represents the various countries in those international councils? Most probably the respective Ministers of Magic. Which brings us inevitably to the conclusion that the three powers of legislation, executive and jurisdiction are by no means separated, but concentrated in one single institution: The Ministry of Magic. In terms of Muggle political science, this means just plain dictatorship. In the light of these reflections, the idea of Cornelius Fudge as Minister of Magic after Voldemort's comeback makes my stomach turn. Unless there is some, yet unmentioned, independent Council of Sages who can step in to prevent the worst, Fudge and his Heads of Department simply have too much power for anybody's good. Any thoughts??? Susanna/pigwidgeon37 From hunao01 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 07:30:29 2001 From: hunao01 at yahoo.com (hunao01) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 07:30:29 -0000 Subject: Origin of Harry's powers / ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9up6sc+guuc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9upr6l+oqtm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31033 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "sonjahric" wrote: In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - Keeper of the Keys, > Hagrid said, > > "Stop Lily an' James Potter's son goin' ter Howarts! Yer mad. His > name's been down ever since he was born." > > This obviously proves that Harry was born with the powers that he > has. (Just my opinion: I believe that Harry was prophesized to be a > great and powerful wizard that would eventually take down Voldemort > and Voldemort went to kill Harry and not his parents.) I agree. Harry did born with great power. But Voldemort also intended to kill James. So I guess the prophecy he heard was like "one day a man named Potter will kill the Dark Lord", so that's why he wanted to kill James and Harry but was willing to spare lilly. From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it Fri Dec 7 07:43:41 2001 From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (pigwidgeon37) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 07:43:41 -0000 Subject: Snape &Glory?Nope- Snape and Acknowledgement? Yes! (long) Message-ID: <9uprvd+feqv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31034 Tabouli wrote: >Welll yes, but is Snape really the glory-huntin' type? >I'm sure he wouldn't turn down an Order of Merlin >first class if it were offered, but I'm not convinced >that being liked and admired is high on Snape's >priority list (compare him with Lockhart, for whom >this is the most important thing in life!). He's >surly and nasty and bad-tempered (not a great way of >winning admirers and friends), he neglects his >personal appearance (ditto), and being a spy/double >agent/whichever he is is by definition a job where he >has to keep a low profile, lest he gets caught or even >assasinated by either side. A difficult, dangerous >job, but hardly one to win him fame and glory. >Respect yes, but hardly glory. How conclusively would >you need to win a war for the spy to be safe running >around with front page praises and garlands round his >neck? Thanks to everybody who brings up my favourite subject: Snape's twisted personality. I agree with Tabouli that Snape is NOT the type searching for glory, Orders of Merlin of whichever class or other superficial signs of fame so treasured by our darling Gilderoy. But I think that a person as intelligent as Snape (and I suppose we all agree about that particular detail, no matter whether we loathe or like him) and so little conceited as he, can't have a very high opinion of himself. Let me explain: I think it is sufficiently clear that, at least for a certain time, Snape *was* a DE. No way past that. Being a DE implies that you have to kill, torture, rape and whatever other cruelties come to your mind- somehow, the concept of the "Schreibtischtaeter" (wonderful, non-translateable German word for the criminal mind who commits his crimes by planning them out at his desk, but never takes part actively) doesn't quite fit with LV and his merry gang. So I'd say we can take it for granted that Snape had his fair share of killing etc. Now something made him change his mind and (re?)turn to the Good Guys, whatever that might have been. Such a change of mind implies that he had to feel guilty or even merely disgusted by what he had done so far as LV's henchman. I admit that I'm walking on thin ice now, for philosophy has never been one of my strong points, but I daresay that the feeling of guilt, regardless of religion or faith, screams for redemption. The question is, when does a person consider him/herself redeemed? I don't think that Snape, once he has realized the extent of what he had done, could forgive himself easily. Another, IMO very important, factor in this process of self- redemption is forgiveness, Snape has to forgive himself and *others* have to forgive him. And here, he doesn't have a very high score. In fact, it seems that Dumbledore is the only one to have forgiven and to trust him. Maybe this is going a bit far and a little to fanfictionally, but I'd say that, for regaining self-esteem and forgiveness, Snape depends entirely on Dumbledore. OK, now I'm finally coming to the point: Whenever Snape enters into confrontation with Harry in the presence of Dumbledore, he loses. Of course, he is already prejudiced against Harry, maybe merely because Harry is a faithful replica of his best-hated schoolday enemy, maybe for other reasons. James Potter had the bonus of being the charming golden boy (at least that is what Snape tells us). Harry has the double bonus of being the Potters' son AND The Boy Who Lived. What's Snape's bonus? Close to zero. Dumbledore's trust in him and that's it. And to Snape, it must seem that, albeit D. still trusts him, he prefers a boy who continually gets himslef into the most outlandish situations, endangering his life, to him. Not an easy thing to swallow. And certainly not apt to diminish his prejudice against Harry, which, on the contrary, gets stronger each time he "loses" to him. Early morning rant finished. Time to go to work. Susanna/pigwidgeon37 From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Fri Dec 7 10:04:59 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:04:59 -0000 Subject: Who saw the time travellers? In-Reply-To: <16885237278.20011206202101@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <9uq48b+beep@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31035 Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > Harry is seen by his past self... And someone else. > Extra brownie points for naming the other individual who sees them. > :) > >From memory: Dumbledore, Sirius, Buckbeak all see him. Of these only Dumbledore counts as the others are not aware that H&H are somewhere else at the same time. I have a vague memory of Fang? Likewise, he would just imagine they were just returning after a few minutes. The other possibilities would be Lupin in wolf form, and Pettigrew in rat form. Snape, it seems, woke too late, unless he is lying (and consummately acting out a synthetic rage) to Fudge. The Dementors would have been aware of both Harrys - but we know from the Crouch substitution that they don't sense the individuality of humans. The full detail of what Lupin saw on the map will probably never be known. So: Dumbledore. David From aromano at indiana.edu Fri Dec 7 05:35:55 2001 From: aromano at indiana.edu (Aja Fair Romano) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:35:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: Joseph Campbell et. al. (was Commandments) In-Reply-To: <1007674791.3496.1434.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31036 Okay, I'm going to dive in. *takes deep breath* Hi all. My name's Aja, I'm very new here. I've been on the list 2 days and yes, i'm overwhelmed by all the messages because it's been years since I was on a high volume mailing list. But I'll get used to it. ;) A brief intro: I'm 23, I live in Indiana, and I'm a theatre reviewer and part time English student. I love Stephen Sondheim and I'd love to write "Harry! the musical!" someday. *grin* I've been a huge Harry Potter fan for three years and I got all my friends hooked on the books. I've been flitting around the mailing lists, fan fic communities, and the websites since the start, but it was mostly just a fling until the movie came out, when, after seeing it 8 times and taking *notes* on it the last couple of times, I realized I was officially obsessed and I'd better hie myself over to HPFGU. So, here I am. Normally I wouldn't leap right in but someone mentioned Joseph Campbell and I had to say brava!! I love Joseph Campbell and his take on myths and what they mean for our lives. His conversations with Bill Moyers are a truly amazing read. Anyway, to the point: I once had a discussion with someone about this same principle. We were comparing the end of GOF with the end of Empire Strikes Back and I brought up Campbell's theories about the hero myth. While my friend recognized the hero myth at work in Star Wars, he was reluctant to recognize it in Harry Potter because while there is a journey that takes place in the growth of the central character and his development as he learns to fight the bad guy, there really isn't a *choice* involved in his decision to be the good guy. He argued that since Harry's parents were murdered by Voldemort, Harry's destiny was therefore set, and his choice made for him. Looking back, it occurs to me that Hamlet would also fall in this category of a not-quite hero myth according to my friend's perception. Any thoughts on this, and how Harry's parents' murder might have stunted his hero-growth?? Best wishes to all, Aja On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 18:31:53 -0000 Ftah3 wrote: > Something I really appreciate about Rowling's stories is that I see a > lot of what's called "Hero's Journey" mythology in them... To whit, > incidentally, George Lucas wrote the entire Star Wars story {including > the episodes currently being filmed/released} based on Campbell's book > "Hero with a Thousand Faces.") From ktchong73 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 10:04:34 2001 From: ktchong73 at yahoo.com (luminary_extraordinaire) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 10:04:34 -0000 Subject: Wormtail Has NO Intention Of Saving Harry In-Reply-To: <39.1ee15f0e.294096ca@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uq47i+mqfk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31037 Re: Harry and Voldemort: The "final" battle --- In HPforGrownups at y..., IAmLordCassandra at a... wrote: > Voldemort may be been more noble during their first duel, but he is > capable of not playing fair. Voldemort was not being "noble" during their [him and Harry's] first duel. He was overconfident and underestimated his match. He was too certain that he could easily defeat Harry, and he did not anticipate anyone or anything that could save Harry. > Hmm...perhaps someone will jump in the way {Wormtail? Snape?} to' > save Harry. I'm seeing Wormtail here. Having that magical bond with > Harry, he feels the need to save Harry's life as Harry did his and > ends up either trying to jump Voldemort or protecting Harry, losing > his own life in the end. Wormtail will NOT "feel the need" to save Harry's life. Wormtail will NOT "try" to jump Voldemort or protect Harry. He has not risk his life to save Harry before, and he will NEVER willingly risk his own life to save Harry. Certainly he had been reluctant to capture Harry for reviving Voldemort, but that is only because he did not want to invite a confrontation with Harry's many powerful protectors (e.g., Dumbledore, Black, Lupus.) Wormtail has only ONE interest in his heart: his self-preservation. Everything he has done serves ONE purpose: to save his own skins. It is faulty to assume that Wormtail has any sort of redeeming quality, that he will redeem himself with an ultimate noble sacrifice and be "forgiven". While such sacrifice favors the core values of Judeo-Christianity, it is inconsistent with Wormtail's characterization, it undermines the continuity of Wormtail's character development. When Wormtail saves Harry, it will NOT be a willing nor noble act. Wormtail will NOT willingly or selflessly save Harry. We know Wormtail will play a part in "helping" (not necessarily saving) Harry in some way, but the help will be quite accidental and unexpected. FATE, not Wormtail, will dictate his action in aiding Harry. In the classical mythological context, it is FATE--NOT the will of men--that binds life debt. From akpoohbear2002 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 03:43:10 2001 From: akpoohbear2002 at yahoo.com (vanessa pryor) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:43:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Beatitudes In-Reply-To: <9uot4u+ied9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207034310.85616.qmail@web21004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31038 lucky_kari wrote: ---Dumbledore is the great peacemaker, bringing even Sirius and Snape together at the end of GoF Yeah but he also gets Snape to be more friendly to Harry, or at least thats what I got from the end of GoF. vanessa __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From akpoohbear2002 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 03:59:31 2001 From: akpoohbear2002 at yahoo.com (vanessa pryor) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:59:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Origin of Harry's powers / ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9up6sc+guuc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207035931.17013.qmail@web21008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31039 Recently, several members speculated that Harry might have received all of his powers from Voldemort (that Harry might have been a squib) --- I dont think that Harry got all his powers from Voldemort but he did get some. From the failed curse Voldemort lost most of his powers and some went into Harry i.e. being parsletongue vanessa __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From jenrose981 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 05:10:03 2001 From: jenrose981 at hotmail.com (Jennifer Kington) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 00:10:03 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31040 >From: "hp_lexicon" >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: time turner and nov. 1, 1981; "The Rules" >Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 04:31:17 -0000 > >--- In HPforGrownups at y..., Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > > > Harry is seen by his past self... And someone else. > > Extra brownie points for naming the other individual who seems >them. > >Me now: Um, I'm assuming that we're refering to Dumbledore here since he was the one who let them back into the hospital wing. I recall everyone else being passed out at the time Harry made the Patronus. Unless I missed something... which is entirely likely! Jen _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From cindysphynx at home.com Fri Dec 7 12:50:41 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:50:41 -0000 Subject: Wormtail Has NO Intention Of Saving Harry In-Reply-To: <9uq47i+mqfk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqdv1+kjev@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31041 "luminary_extraordinaire" wrote: > Wormtail will NOT "feel the need" to save Harry's life. Wormtail > will NOT "try" to jump Voldemort or protect Harry. I guess we have to consider the possibility that Wormtail has already re-paid his debt to Harry. After all, Wormtail untied Harry and gave him back his wand. These acts allowed Harry to escape. Maybe Wormtail is now off the hook. As Dumbledore explains it, though, Wormtail's debt may be of a type that cannot be repaid. Dumbledore says, "When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them . . . and I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter." Maybe Wormtail's debt to Harry and Snape's debt to James exists for a lifetime. Cindy From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Fri Dec 7 13:05:32 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:05:32 -0000 Subject: Finding JKR's room of desire In-Reply-To: <9uosj5+bmj6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqeqs+ljic@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31042 Frances wrote: > Isaac: If you could travel to Hogwarts for an hour, what would you do there? > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > I feel some analysis ought to be helpful here. We need a L.O.O.N. to carry out the following steps: 0) Stop guessing at random. 1) List all Hogwarts rooms mentioned in book four - note that we have to be a bit careful: we can't *prove* the Pensieve room is not at Hogwarts, though the presence of Dementors is a strong contra- indication. 2) Strike out all those which are mentioned in earlier books, e.g. kitchens. 3) Strike out those where Harry has not had *any* opportunity to discover magical properties - JKR's comment implies to me that Harry knows a bit about the room. For example, I don't think it would have been fair for JKR to describe the chamberpot room in this way. 4) Strike out any rooms where we are confident there is no more to be discovered by Harry. 5) and most important, consider what would make any of the remaining contenders be so interesting that JKR would rather go there than, say, Dumbledore's office. I can see the prefects' bathroom surviving the above process; the side office possibly too - what would the properties be?. But the whole point of the above list is that there may be others. David From midwife34 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 13:00:36 2001 From: midwife34 at aol.com (jrober4211) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:00:36 -0000 Subject: Scabbers bites Goyle Message-ID: <9uqehk+ngq7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31043 This is my first post. I hope I am not being redundant, but I searched and only found a couple of entries regarding this topic in the archives. I have a question for those that are more detail oriented than I am. Who believes that Wormtail/Pettigrew/Scabbers will play a significant part in the downfall of Voldemort in future books? Other than the obvious reference of Dumbledore's regarding Harry showing mercy to Pettigrew in the shrieking shack, why would Scabbers bite Goyle on the train when he obviously knew Goyle either was a Deatheater or his father was? Does anyone know any other examples of foreshadowing of Scabbers/Pettigrew/Wormtail redemption in the books? From ftah3 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 13:33:21 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:33:21 -0000 Subject: Joseph Campbell et. al. (was Commandments) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uqgf1+1bep@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31044 Yay, Aja! You're right about "The Power of Myth" (w/ Bill Moyers) ~ fab! "The Inner Reaches of Outer Space" is also good, imho. Aja wrote: > Anyway, to the point: I once had a discussion with someone about this same > principle. We were comparing the end of GOF with the end of Empire > Strikes Back and I brought up Campbell's theories about the hero myth. > While my friend recognized the hero myth at work in Star Wars, he was > reluctant to recognize it in Harry Potter because while there is a journey > that takes place in the growth of the central character and his > development as he learns to fight the bad guy, there really isn't a > *choice* involved in his decision to be the good guy. He argued that > since Harry's parents were murdered by Voldemort, Harry's destiny was > therefore set, and his choice made for him. Firstly, most Hero's Journey heroes *are* fated to become heroes. That is actually one of the points Campbell makes in "Hero w/ a Thousand Faces." When you see the mythology at work, you know that even though the hero will have to make tough choices, he'll make the right ones eventually because it's his destiny. So actually, Campbellianly, Harry's exactly the same kind of hero as those in Star Wars. But I think possibly your friend might be focusing more on the *appearance* of choice, rather than mythical destiny. On the one hand, there are all kinds of Hero types in 'Hero's Journey' mythology. Reluctant Heroes, for one thing, are absolutely rife in Star Wars. Han Solo, hi there. :-P Luke Skywalker, though more outwardly 'destined' to be a hero, is also rather reluctant. And I think that the Reluctant Hero seems more 'true' to the audience. We don't feel like heroes, we know, deep down, we'd have to be dragged kicking and screaming, into heroic action; so watching Reluctant Heroes make choices and overcome their reluctance is more inspiring and seems more 'real.' But the thing is, even if Harry doesn't have to be dragged yowling hysterically into the wizard world, and even though he seems to make the right choice rather effortlessly, still his journey is *all* about choices. Yes, his parents were murdered by Voldemort, and that is significant, but Dumbledore makes sure that for the first, most informative years of Harry's life, that fact *does not sway* the development of Harry's character. Harry spends ten years having not the slightest idea that he is either special nor required to be a 'good guy' because of an evil wizard's actions. Of course, all that wouldn't matter, if in fact Harry's path was simply a matter of fate. But it's not. It's a matter of choice. I'm going to pull out three quick for-instances as evidence, and then I have to be a good worker-bee and get back to my job. :-P So, once he begins his 'Hero's Journey,' he's making choices from the get-go. On the train to Hogwarts, he has to choose between Ron, a poor kid with no apparent connections, and Draco Malfoy, a rich, confident kid with friends/lackeys and an influential father. Harry chooses Ron as the 'right' kind of people. It's a small thing, but it's significant. Harry is brand-spanking-new to that world, and the first thing he does is tell a great bully to shove off. Has nothing to do with his parents, or the manner of their death ~ it's a choice that demonstrates in a small way what kind of person Harry is. More significantly, look at Harry's Sorting. The Hat tells him that he could be great, and that being in Slytherin would help him to that end. To a certain type of individual, it wouldn't matter *who* had been in Slytherin in the past, so long as that house would help him become a great wizard. Harry, on the other hand, doesn't want to be in a house that produces dark wizards and contains Draco Malfoy. "Anything but Slytherin," he says. And the Hat puts him in Gryffindor. You *could* argue that Harry was fated to choose anything but Slytherin because Voldemort killed his family. But think: is it that cut and dried? Not at all, imho. Speculation: "I'm Harry; Voldemort was unbelievably powerful and killed my family. I want to make sure I'm unbelievably powerful, just in case Voldemort, or anyone else for that matter, crawls out of the gutter and comes after me, because in the end power is all that matters to keep me safe! I choose Slytherin." So Harry didn't make that decision. But I bet you could name me one guy who *would* have made that decision. And chances are you would name me Tom Riddle. Look at the end of Chamber of Secrets, and Harry's conversation with Dumbledore. Harry tells Dumbledore his fears that maybe he *is* like Riddle/Voldemort. The Parseltongue thing, and especially the fact that the Sorting Hat tried to put him in Slytherin. Dumbledore says that the Hat didn't put Harry in Slytherin, and Harry says that was only because he asked it not to! Right, says Dumbledore ~ because it's all about *choices.* You could say, really, that Harry's destiny is up in the air *right up to the point that he chooses 'anything but Slytherin.* Having been touched by Voldemort, and having some of Voldemort's essence as part of him, he straddles two paths, two destinies ~ the path to evil (Voldemort's legacy, embodied by Slytherin in that scene) or the path to good (his parents' legacy, i.e. Gryffindor). He *chooses* good. Harry is not Reluctant, but he is the poster child for Campbell's Hero. Nor is his hero-growth stunted, at all. One more example: by the time Prisoner of Azkaban occured, Harry knew exactly what he owed Voldemort for killing his parents ~ he heard it in his head every time a Dementor got near him. After hearing about Sirius Black's apparent betrayal of his parents, he was so angry. And then suddenly he had Sirius Black at his mercy in the shrieking shack. He could have killed Black. But he didn't, he froze up, and was angry with himself about it. And yet, when Black and Lupin had a chance to kill Pettigrew a short time later, again, he *chooses* to stop them. He chooses the right path, because regardless of how he feels, he knows that the right thing is the thing his father would have wanted: for Black and Lupin to *not* make murderers of themselves on James & Lily Potter's behalf. Imho, that's extraordinary hero-growth. Anyhow, I think the big telling moment is the Sorting Hat moment; that's the one to point out to your friend in your next friendly debate. ;-) One more thing: >I love Stephen Sondheim and I'd love to write > "Harry! the musical!" someday. *grin* You go! Woo! Mahoney From andylynnlegore at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 13:39:32 2001 From: andylynnlegore at hotmail.com (scootergrid) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 13:39:32 -0000 Subject: Finding JKR's room of desire In-Reply-To: <9uqeqs+ljic@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqgqk+sbs6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31045 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "davewitley" wrote: > Frances wrote: > > Isaac: If you could travel to Hogwarts for an hour, what would you > do there? > > > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which > has certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > > > An argument for the prefects bathroom- Perhaps one of the trio, Hermione of course, will become a prefect and thus have access to the bathroom and its secrets. As part of the tremendous trio, what is left but to share the news with Harry and Ron and get on with their next adventure. As for the side room- It doesn't seem as though there was anything special foreshadowed in JKs description of the side room (unlike the bathroom and its big tub and wacky bubbles) but, of course, we can never know for sure what JK has stewing for us in her imagination. Andy From cindysphynx at home.com Fri Dec 7 14:09:18 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 14:09:18 -0000 Subject: Ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9up6sc+guuc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqiie+1cl7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31046 sonjahric wrote: > >Someone said that besides the usual > ways (normal ways to kill muggles) there are probably other magical > ways. (Implying that wizards can die from the same things that kill > muggles.) In most circumstances, I do not believe that a wizard can > die in the "usual" way. In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - Keeper of the Keys, > Hagrid said, > > "'CAR CRASH!' roared Hagrid, . . . 'How could a car crash kill Lily > an' James Potter? It's an outrage! A scandal!'" > Hmmm. There seems to be conflicting canon evidence about whether wizards can die in the usual way. For instance, when Harry falls off of his broom in PoA, a student says she thought he had died. The fact that Quireldemort tries to shake Harry off of his broom is further evidence that wizards can die from falls. Maybe what Hagrid means about James and Lily dying in a car crash isn't that a car crash would never kill them. Maybe he just means that James and Lily would never have reason to be in an ordinary Muggle car. Cindy From cindysphynx at home.com Fri Dec 7 14:57:47 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 14:57:47 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9upp9s+44cl@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqldb+l410@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31047 Susanna wrote: >snip great observations about duties and powers of Minister of Magic> >So far, this wouldn't represent a particular problem, but things get > a bit more difficult when we turn our attention to the legislative > body (parliament), which is blatantly absent. Now, there must be such > a thing as magical law, because there is a Magical Law Enforcement > (an analogon to Muggle police), and you can't enforce a law that > doesn't exist. I think there *must* be some sort of Magical Congress or Parliament, but that we just haven't seen it. There are other political figures you'd expect to see who haven't made an appearance yet. For instance, one would think someone would be the mayor of Hogsmeade. But for all of the trips to Hogsmeade and the presence of the dementors, there is no communication by or appearance of the mayor. In fact, the notice on the door of Honeydukes in PoA informing visitors that the dementors will be patrolling is from MoM, not the local authorities in Hogsmeade. Also, Fudge tells Snape in PoA that he'll try to arrange for Snape to receive Order of Merlin, First Class, if Fudge can manage it. This suggests that *someone* has authority over Fudge in these matters -- probably the wizarding legislature. I don't think Fudge is necessarily supposed to be a dictator. I think he is just sort of representative of the most of the government, rolled up into one person for convenience and simplicity. The other reason I don't think the wizarding world is a dictatorship is that Crouch Sr. had substantial powers as the Head of Magical Law Enforcement. He, not the Minister of Magic, made a number of critical decisions (aurors could use unforgivable curses). Since the wizarding world was in a war with Voldemort, Crouch Sr.'s power to direct the war effort suggests that he, not the Minister of Magic, might be the commander in chief. Susanna again: > And things get downright scary, at least for someone who has grown up > in a democracy and sticks to its values, when it comes to > jurisdiction: There are no independent courts in the British > wizarding world. Not only that, but the person who in Muggle terms > would be the Minister of Interior Affairs (Crouch Sr.) acts as judge > AND public prosecutor in a trial where life sentences to Azkaban are > at stake. Not to mention that the defendants don't even have a lawyer > but must defend themselves. > It is certainly true that due process is, um, truncated in the wizarding world. Hagrid and Sirius both get hauled off to Azkaban without trials, and Hagrid went there during peacetime on skimpy evidence indeed. I'm not ready to pronounce wizarding justice as a complete disaster, though. There were three "trials" in GoF, but only one was really a trial (Bagman), and the defendant was acquitted. Karkaroff's pensieve scene wasn't a trial, but an interrogation, and MoM kept up its end of the plea bargain by releasing him. Crouch Jr.'s appearance sounds like a crude version of a sentencing, not a trial. Crouch Sr. says they have heard the evidence, and he asks the jury "to raise their hands if they believe, as I do, that these crimes deserve a life sentence in Azkaban." I do wonder, however, whether the terrible shortcomings in the wizarding justice system are by design (to keep it simple)or are just due to some lack of understanding about how some of these things are supposed to work. In the U.S., a judge or prosecutor who polls the jury by stating his or her own personal view of the defendant's guilt will cause a mistrial. I believe it is also considered bad form to chain the defendant in the presence of a jury that is deciding the defendant's fate. I don't know about the British justice system, but I'd be surprised if British legal proceedings look anything like these. Does anyone know? Susanna again: > Which brings us inevitably to the conclusion that the three powers of > legislation, executive and jurisdiction are by no means separated, > but concentrated in one single institution: The Ministry of Magic. Hmmm. Well, if the Ministry of Magic is equivalent to the U.S. government, then it might very well have separation of powers after all. Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. Fudge would be head of the executive branch. The "missing links" are the leaders of the legislative branch, who (in the U.S.) are so dull that it doesn't surprise me that JKR might decide not to clutter the books with them. :-) Cindy (resisting the strong urge to compare Crouch Sr.'s handling of criminal justice during wartime and John Ashcroft's handling of same) From JamiDeise at aol.com Fri Dec 7 14:57:45 2001 From: JamiDeise at aol.com (JamiDeise at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:57:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Joseph Campbell et. al. (was Commandments) Message-ID: <11a.85fe352.294232e9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31048 In a message dated 12/7/2001 5:29:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, aromano at indiana.edu writes: << While my friend recognized the hero myth at work in Star Wars, he was reluctant to recognize it in Harry Potter because while there is a journey that takes place in the growth of the central character and his development as he learns to fight the bad guy, there really isn't a *choice* involved in his decision to be the good guy. He argued that since Harry's parents were murdered by Voldemort, Harry's destiny was therefore set, and his choice made for him. Looking back, it occurs to me that Hamlet would also fall in this category of a not-quite hero myth according to my friend's perception. Any thoughts on this, and how Harry's parents' murder might have stunted his hero-growth?? >> I think Harry is definitely a hero in the classic Joseph Campbell sense. Where did he make his choice? When Malfoy stuck out his hand, told Harry that some wizarding families are better than others, and that he, Malfoy, could help Harry with that. Harry refused to shake Malfoy's hand and told him he could figure out for himself which families were the right families. Choice offered, correct path taken. I did think it was interesting in the movie, though, that the screenwriter made some changes so that Harry could adhere even more slavishly to the "hero's journey" ... SPOILER SPACE FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T SEEN AND DON'T WANT TO KNOW (though I can't imagine any are left on this list) -- Hagrid actually gives Harry a choice: come with me or stay with the Dursleys. Of course it wasn't a real choice for anyone with half a brain, and certainly doesn't bring to mind Luke telling Obi-Wan about the farm, the crops, his uncle, but it was still reworked so that Harry would choose. -- Harry's final confrontation with Quirrell/Voldemort -- I found it very annoying that Ron made such a big deal that Harry had to face him ALONE ... but that is the requirement at the end of the hero's journey. You go into the final confrontation with evil alone, and there's no Dumbledore at the end to rescue you. Though in the book it seemed to me that Dumbledore arrived after Harry had defeated Quirrell, but I guess the screenwriter didn't want anything to be open to interpretation. Jami From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 15:47:45 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:47:45 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9um4en+7mpv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqob2+kpjm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31049 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > > Then, Joshua Dyal wrote: > > > Sirius, et al lived in fairly innocent times -- there was no > > > Voldemort rampaging through Hogwarts trying to kill them. > Actually... considering that Voldemort was in his ascendancy for ten > years before he took on the Potters, wouldn't that dictate that the > Marauders were *not* in school during "fairly innocent times," for > the most part? I believe the common interpretation is that Harry was > born when the Potters were just twenty years old (having graduated in > 1978), and we know factually that his parents were killed just over a > year later. That would of course make *all* of the Marauders' school > years coincide with Voldemort's increasingly harsh power period. See my quotes above. Hogwarts was the one place that was safe during that time, and James et al were not specific targets, as Harry is. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 15:52:07 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:52:07 -0000 Subject: Head Boy/Lupin Re: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Mara... In-Reply-To: <9c.1776dad1.293fefcf@aol.com> Message-ID: <9uqoj7+ur6g@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31050 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Calypso8604 at a... wrote: > It's also been stated that several of the professors were wary of Lupin > because of his werewolf status. This creates an unfair bias against him. > Perhaps they simply never mentioned Remus' abilities because they were > reluctant to admit it. Not saying they are all narrow-minded but it's > something to keep in mind > > Calypso That's potentially true, but not relevant to the comments I was making: I was disputing the idea that James got more credit for being "well-rounded" rather than intelligent. *That* much at least, is confirmable by the text, and has nothing to do with Remus. Also, although what you say may be true, we still have nothing whatsoever to go on if we try to claim that Remus was of above-average capability as a wizard. What are his strengths? What is he good at? DADA? He taught the students to do as well as him in one year. Sure, he's capable, but does that make him exceptional? He admits to not being very good at potions. There are reasons in the text for assuming that James and Sirius were exceptionally bright, but there is nothing whatsoever to indicate that Remus is. Joshua Dyal From gwynyth at drizzle.com Fri Dec 7 15:29:28 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:29:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9uqldb+l410@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31051 On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, cindysphynx wrote: > I do wonder, however, whether the terrible shortcomings in the > wizarding justice system are by design (to keep it simple)or are just > due to some lack of understanding about how some of these things are > supposed to work. I think it's actually something much simpler: simple lack of population and population density. A community of 25,000 or 50,000 needs far different sets of requirements than a community ten or a hundred times bigger. In a situation where most adults know or know of each other (not impossible in a community whose total size is 25,000 or so with a single school serving the geographic area), you don't need the same kinds of governing systems that you need in other situations. It might also be that the Voldemort related trials are the first time such trials have come up in anyone's living memory, and that they just don't need to do them all that often. It seems like most against-the-law things (using magic on Muggles, etc) are pretty straightforward - you do it, you get a certain punishment, the situation is cut and dry. (Much like, say, most schools have certain punishments. At most they might have a small committee that oversees such issues, but that's about as complex as it gets) It's entirely possible, however, that Voldemort was the first person (or at least the first person in a long time) to coerce people, to use the Unforgiveable Curses, etc. And so the system just wasn't really designed to deal with it, and they had to scramble together something that worked, while having lost a lot of people who *were* responsible and in responsible positions on top of that. It's not really suprising that things might be a bit.. irregular in that case. A good example, perhaps, is some of the post WWII legal stuff - people were dealing with issues that no one had really dealt with much before, partly becuase you were dealing with an international issue for the first time. It doesn't suprise me that in a similar 'eep, we've never dealt with this before' instance in a community without a strong legal tradition that you'd scramble and make some errors of judgement. (I'd point out that we really don't know much about how Grindewald came to power, or how his minions, if there were minions, might have been recruited. It may be that they were all clearly guilty (assuming that Grindewald had minions), and there weren't issues of people acting under the Imperious curse, and so on which complicate the Voldemort issues. Basically, we don't have much real data on the most recent pre-Voldemort Dark Wizard who might have produced lots of trials. Or might not have. We don't know.) So, between the question of scale, and the fact that it might be a new issue that hadn't come up before (or at least not at all recently), I don't see anything really bizzare about what structure we see. It's an administrative framework, really, not a judicial one, even though the administrative stuff includes stuff that is called 'legal' and 'illegal'. From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 14:54:07 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 09:54:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Finding JKR's room of desire Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31052 > Frances wrote: > > Isaac: If you could travel to Hogwarts for an hour, what would you > do there? > > > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which > has certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > > > An argument for the prefects bathroom- Perhaps one of the trio, Hermione of course, will become a prefect and thus have access to the bathroom and its secrets. As part of the tremendous trio, what is left but to share the news with Harry and Ron and get on with their next adventure. As for the side room- It doesn't seem as though there was anything special foreshadowed in JKs description of the side room (unlike the bathroom and its big tub and wacky bubbles) but, of course, we can never know for sure what JK has stewing for us in her imagination. Andy ___________________________________________________ Here is waht I am thinking I need to remind everyone that Harry has been to the Prefects bathroom. He went to it trying to figure out what the second ws going to be. In a way Harry has been to the Pensive Room, when they were having the trials. I still think it is the room with the Chamber Pots He also been in the room off to the Great Hall. Well, that ia all folks Jo-Jo (who has to write 20 some odd journals in two hours for class) From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 15:57:36 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:57:36 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9um4kf+84tn@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqotg+pdbk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31053 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lenmachine" wrote: > On the fact that on the day Voldemort was defeated, nearly every > witch and wizard in Britain celebrated -- they were ecstatic enough > to let their guards slip, for just one moment. Why ? Because, despite > any disagreements on policy or on strategy, most wizards wanted to > see Voldemort defeated, even if they didn't know how it was ever > going to happen. I believe you're painting with too broad a brush here. Just because everyone? was excited to see Voldemort defeated doesn't mean they were unilaterally united against him. They would be just as excited if they tried just to stay out of the way, which I imagine most wizards may well have done, rather than actively opposing him. Joshua Dyal From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Fri Dec 7 16:05:13 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:05:13 -0000 Subject: Wormtail Has NO Intention Of Saving Harry In-Reply-To: <9uqdv1+kjev@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqpbp+nnm1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31054 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > "luminary_extraordinaire" wrote: > > > Wormtail will NOT "feel the need" to save Harry's life. Wormtail > > will NOT "try" to jump Voldemort or protect Harry. > > I guess we have to consider the possibility that Wormtail has already > re-paid his debt to Harry. After all, Wormtail untied Harry and gave > him back his wand. These acts allowed Harry to escape. Maybe > Wormtail is now off the hook. I don't see this. Wormtail only untied Harry and gave him back his wand because Voldemort told him to - so they could duel. Therefore I don't understand how this repays the debt or lets him off the hook - he was acting on his master's instructions. > As Dumbledore explains it, though, Wormtail's debt may be of a type > that cannot be repaid. Dumbledore says, "When one wizard saves > another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them . . . > and I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of > Harry Potter." > > Maybe Wormtail's debt to Harry and Snape's debt to James exists for a > lifetime. I'm not sure about this, either. Doesn't Dumbledore say at the end of PS was that Snape was spending so much time keeping Harry alive because of the debt between him and James - and that once this was done (as it was partly during the Quidditch game, and also by the fact that Snape was keeping his eye on Harry the rest of the time) that Snape could go back to hating the memory of James in peace? In other words, Dumbledore seems to think that Snape has paid his debt to James by saving his son, and doesn't owe him anything else. Going back a few years as well, and repeating something said before, I think that it was from Snape that Dumbledore heard that the Potters were in danger. So did Snape feel that he had tried to pay the debt back at this point as well - only to be ignored? Or did Snape feel that because the Potters died anyway, then he failed? Perhaps he was sure that it was Sirius who was the spy. Catherine From liquidfire at mindgate.net Fri Dec 7 16:04:42 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 00:04:42 +0800 Subject: Snape as guardian, something on the Marauder map Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011208000442.007a11a0@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 31055 Ana wrote: >Of course, Harry's mistrust of Snape is the result of Snape's nasty classroom attitude. It was ruthlessly provoked by Snape at their very first meeting. Why, I wonder, Snape chose to alienate Harry ? If he is indeed Harry' guardian, he just brought much trouble on himself. Because Snape is a jealous git (But I like him anyway). I've read some posts over the last week or so (including a fabulously well-thought out theory by Heather regarding his 'pact') that state that Snape may not necessarily like Harry, but is honor-bound to protect him. It kinda makes sense, when you think about it. Haven't you ever stuck out for anybody because you HAD to, not bacause you WANT to? Very, very possible here, I think. Cassie wrote: >Sorry if someone's already brought this up-but it wasn't the easiest thing to search for so I'm taking a chance here. I noticed that in the Shreiking Shack Snape tells them all that he saw them on the marauder's map. During the second time, when Hermione and Harry use the time turner, wouldn't Snape see the extra Harry and Hermione? Just a guess, albiet a educated one: Maybe Snape was too focused on that group of really, really interesting people in the Shreiking Shack that he didn't notice Harry2 and Hermione2 in the forest. And that's another thing: does the Marauder map show Hogwarts' outer grounds? I kind of guessed that the map (problematic enough as it is) only shows the lay-out of the castle. Besides, Snape only saw Lupin's dot running in the corridors. It doesn't state anywhere (come to think of it) that he actually saw all of them in the map. Liquidfire From DJHarkavy at aol.com Fri Dec 7 16:19:51 2001 From: DJHarkavy at aol.com (DJHarkavy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 11:19:51 EST Subject: Origin of Harry's powers / ways to kill a wizard Message-ID: <174.5c53a8.29424628@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31056 Vanessa wrote: > --- > I dont think that Harry got all his powers from > Voldemort but he did get some. From the failed curse > Voldemort lost most of his powers and some went into > Harry i.e. being parsletongue Taken a little further, does that mean with Voldy revived and having Harry's blood, Harry will lose the abilities that he gained from Voldy in the first place? Dan H. From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 16:44:13 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:44:13 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uqrkt+itq3@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31057 Jenett wrote: > So, between the question of scale, and the fact that it might be a new > issue that hadn't come up before (or at least not at all recently), I > don't see anything really bizzare about what structure we see. It's an > administrative framework, really, not a judicial one, even though the > administrative stuff includes stuff that is called 'legal' and 'illegal'. I tend to agree with your analysis. At least, I believe that, in the framework of the American legal system, the administrative agencies (e.g. the FDA, the FTC, the EPA) have some combination of executive, legislative, and judicial powers. So it can be done, somehow. On the other hand, most, if not all, administrative hearings can be appealed to a court of law (uh, I think). Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it Fri Dec 7 16:56:24 2001 From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (pigwidgeon37) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:56:24 -0000 Subject: Snape's and Wormtail's life debts Message-ID: <9uqsbo+9t3p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31058 Catherine wrote: >Doesn't Dumbledore say at the end >of PS was that Snape was spending so much time keeping Harry alive >because of the debt between him and James - and that once this was >done (as it was partly during the Quidditch game, and also by the >fact that Snape was keeping his eye on Harry the rest of the time) >that Snape could go back to hating the memory of James in peace? In >other words, Dumbledore seems to think that Snape has paid his debt >to James by saving his son, and doesn't owe him anything else. Depends on the nature of the debt, I'd say. In PS/SS, Dumbledore doesn't use the same words he uses in PoA. In PoA, the word "debt" is never mentioned, there Dumbledore speaks of a "bond" that is created between the one who saves and the one who is saved. And a bond certainly seems to be something deeper and more meaningful than a debt you can repay, simply by doing the same thing. OTOH, the two situations are quite different: IMO (I already expressed this opinion in a previous post), James saved Snape as much as he saved his friend Remus- I'm not so sure who of them would have remained dead on the spot, had there really been a confrontation with the werewolf. There can be no doubt that Harry really saved Wormtail from being executed in cold blood by Remus and Sirius, having far less reason to do so than James had for pulling Snape out of the tunnel. Between Snape and the Marauders, there was only more or less justified hate (Gryffindor vs. Slytherin, pranks played on each other), at least so it seems. Between Harry and Wormtail, there is the monstrosity of Peter's betrayal of Harry's parents which is much more difficult to overcome. Another question in this context: If his "debt" to James is the real motive of Snape's watchfulness for Harry- something I'm beginning to doubt- why would that debt or that bond be automatically transferred from father to son? What if the wizard in question dies without leaving a spouse or children? What happens to the debt in that case? Yes, I am definitely beginning to doubt whether Dumbledore told Harry the whole truth about Snape's reasons. It sounds credible to Harry, but it is not convincing. If anybody can enlighten me, please do so! Susanna/pigwidgeon37 (yearning for enlightenment) Going back a few years as well, and repeating something said before, I think that it was from Snape that Dumbledore heard that the Potters were in danger. So did Snape feel that he had tried to pay the debt back at this point as well - only to be ignored? Or did Snape feel that because the Potters died anyway, then he failed? Perhaps he was sure that it was Sirius who was the spy. From Dar20 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 16:57:15 2001 From: Dar20 at aol.com (darlenebuell) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:57:15 -0000 Subject: Snape as guardian, something on the Marauder map In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20011208000442.007a11a0@mindgate.net> Message-ID: <9uqsdb+c7nb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31059 > And that's another > thing: does the Marauder map show Hogwarts' outer grounds? I kind of > guessed that the map (problematic enough as it is) only shows the lay-out > of the castle. Besides, Snape only saw Lupin's dot running in the > corridors. It doesn't state anywhere (come to think of it) that he > actually saw all of them in the map. Don't have my book with me, but doesn't Lupin see Harry, Ron, and Hermione with the 'extra' traveler? (Wormtail) Dar From aiz24 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:01:28 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:01:28 -0500 Subject: Wee little ADMIN Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31060 **********************************************************************Moderator Amy Z sidles onto the scene. She does not have wheels, nor can she fly. She does not have a rock. She does, however, have a scary anagram for her name (read on), which she hopes will sufficiently intimidate everyone into heeding her words. ********************************************************************** Please do two things with all of your posts: (1) credit whomever you're quoting, like so: AbsolutelyFabulous wrote: >Buckbeak is absolutely fabulous! (2) sign them, like so: --Skippy the WonderAnimagus The former makes it easier for everyone to follow a line of conversation, particularly helpful to those list members whose format or e-mail program prevents them from sorting posts by thread. The latter does wonders for creating a nice list atmosphere in which one's personal style, obsessions with particular characters, bugaboos, etc. rapidly become associated with one's name. It becomes tiresome to read a post and then have to scroll back up to see who just made that brilliant point about Snape's fingernails. Thanks! I, VERMONT DOLL AMY = MAINLY VOLDEMORT _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Fri Dec 7 17:11:10 2001 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:11:10 -0000 Subject: Ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9uqiie+1cl7@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqt7e+keeu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31061 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > Hmmm. There seems to be conflicting canon evidence about whether > wizards can die in the usual way. For instance, when Harry falls off > of his broom in PoA, a student says she thought he had died. The > fact that Quireldemort tries to shake Harry off of his broom is > further evidence that wizards can die from falls. I have always found it puzzling that Neville could survive being dropped out of a window unharmed, but the history of Quidditch is full of injuries and even deaths. One way out might be that children are magically protected against normal accidents (not against magic, of course, otherwise the whole edifice of Harry surviving Voldemort's attack falls to the ground), and this wears off as they get older. Adults may be able to take specific magical precautions against specific threats such as car crashes, of course, without any guarantee that some other non-magical cause of death will not carry them off. Automatic protection against non-magic fatality would in general mess up the plot of the books good and proper: Harry could just walk on the bottom of the lake without drowning, for example. Eventually the inability to die from natural causes would become irksome and Dumbledore would be deprived of his next great adventure, short of asking McGonagall to AK him. David, thinking that there's a filk here: There must be fifty ways to kill a wizard. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:28:23 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:28:23 -0000 Subject: Hermione's name In-Reply-To: <9uoood+odui@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqu7n+ts4s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31062 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "mss4a" wrote: > > (incidentally, am I the > > only one who *really* wants Hermione's mum to be called > > Helen?!). > > Hmm, quite possibly. ;) > > Way to go on everything else though! > > Melanie Hmmm... Don't want too many connections here. Hermione was affianced to one fellow, her mum Helen gave her to someone else instead, and the jilted guy ran off and killed Helen! However, since JKR has admitted to getting the name from one of the rather more obscure Shakespeare plays rather than Greek mythology, I think we can safely say those parallels need not apply. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:28:59 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:28:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione's name In-Reply-To: <9uoood+odui@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqu8r+luvu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31063 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "mss4a" wrote: > > (incidentally, am I the > > only one who *really* wants Hermione's mum to be called > > Helen?!). > > Hmm, quite possibly. ;) > > Way to go on everything else though! > > Melanie Hmmm... Don't want too many connections here. Hermione was affianced to one fellow, her mum Helen gave her to someone else instead, and the jilted guy ran off and killed Helen! However, since JKR has admitted to getting the name from one of the rather more obscure Shakespeare plays rather than Greek mythology, I think we can safely say those parallels need not apply. Joshua Dyal From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Fri Dec 7 17:30:11 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:30:11 -0500 Subject: beatitudes, timeturner, Wizard Government References: <1007734188.5550.68968.m11@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C10FCA3.8630D05A@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31064 Eileen did a great job on the Beatitudes. I especially like the comments about Dumbeldore being a peacemaker. I think Hermione may have been persecuted for righteousness' sake-- from her treatment of Rita Skeeter, to her campaign for the house elves, she's probably the most obviously "righteous", and it does seem to cause her grief. Regarding the timeturner (I'm still digging through the second digest of the day), most of the other times when we'd like to see someone use a timeturner, it's too late. Evidently magic operates on a Heisenburg-like principle: as long as nobody saw what happened, you can go meddle with time, but not if there's an observer who can say you didn't. There are too many witnesses who know about James' & Lily's death by the time Dumbledore could send a hit squad back to stop Voldemort. Harry saw himself the first time around, so it's ok that he is seen by himself the second time. BTW, I believe Crookshanks is another being who sees Harry on the second pass through time. Susanna/pigwidgeon37 posted extensively on the shortcomings of Wizard government. Thanks, Susanna. I wrote earlier that it was an anarchy, but your description is much more accurate: a dictatorship. I'd like to see this get improved as one of the outcomes of the events coming up. And I have to wonder if Rowling consciously wrote it this way, or just over-simplified because she didn't want to have to go into detail about the governmental structure. I'm hoping for the former. (Either way, I wonder how this angle gets translated in languages like Chinese? I know the first three books are fully translated, at this point, and maybe even GoF by now. Has this political criticism been missed by the PRC government, or have the books been censored? What about in Russia, or any of a variety of Latin American or African countries? I assume the books have been translated into Arabic-- are they widely available in many Middle-Eastern countries?) Elizabeth From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:36:23 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:36:23 -0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqumn+pgse@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31065 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: > I agree. We should start a club. Can anyone think of an acronym? > > Eileen BEDLAM -- BEtter DeaL for A Muggle?? Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:42:34 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:42:34 -0000 Subject: Commandments; Christianity of HP In-Reply-To: <9uot4u+ied9@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqv2a+h67f@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31066 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: > "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." > > Neville? Winky? The story's not finished enough to find out if they > are rewarded. Harry himself is fairly meek, especially at the beginning of the series. He's still a kid, though, and I'd say he qualifies, esp. compared to Voldemort. In fact, the graveyard scene in GF can be taken as a great example of this precept. Joshua Dyal From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 17:46:57 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:46:57 -0000 Subject: Origin of Harry's powers / ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9up6sc+guuc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqvah+c020@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31067 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "sonjahric" wrote: > In most circumstances, I do not believe that a wizard can > die in the "usual" way. In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - Keeper of the Keys, > Hagrid said, > > "'CAR CRASH!' roared Hagrid, . . . 'How could a car crash kill Lily > an' James Potter? It's an outrage! A scandal!'" > > This is assuming that what Hagrid says is accurate, but I believe it > is. Another simple explanation is that Hagrid says it is outragreous that two wizards would be in a car in the first place. Wizard's don't typically travel that way, after all. Joshua Dyal From squireandknight at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 17:50:52 2001 From: squireandknight at yahoo.com (Becky) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:50:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: <9uoood+odui@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207175052.64697.qmail@web20301.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31068 --- mss4a wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "E S" > wrote: > > Does anyone else find themselves somewhat > perturbed by the > > depiction of muggles in Rowling's world? > > Yeah, totally agree. I think this is a real weak > point. I don't think it's a weak point. (Unless you're talking about a weak point for the wizards :) )I imagine it's intentional. Most Muggles are portrayed fairly realistically I think. I don't mean as idiots, but their responses to magic. For instance, Petunia. I can easily imagine her feeling angry about discovering a whole new magical society, but the only reason she found it was because of Lily. I think from Aunt Petunia's comments in PS/SS about her parents, showed that she felt a lot of sibling rivalry here. Possibly, Lily had always been seen as "odd" and her parents were overjoyed when they found out the reason. I think it's possible that before that, Petunia was the one in the limelight, while Lily was just the "strange little Evans girl." So when it came time for Lily to shine, and Petunia discovered that there was no way to catch up to her, she decided that her parents were missing the point. Lily was still odd, only now she was even more so, she was a freak. So this could help explain the Dursleys, and naturally they wouldn't associate with the most broad-minded of people, so I think this can cover for them. (Not to mention, I can imagine that Vernon gets a kick out of "conspiracy" theories.) I don't mean excuse them, so I should probably say cover for JKR. There *are* people likt that out there. > Although I do > think the Roberts family is a fairly sympathetic > portrayal -- Mr. > Roberts isn't mean (that I recall), and the way > they're victimized, > you can't help but feel for them. > Yeah. I agree here. > > Does anyone else wish we could have a prominent > and > > sympathetic muggle character? > > YES, yes, a thousand times yes! It wouldn't even > have to be a > MAJOR character. Just a Muggle who we know well, > who's nice. > > Melanie > > > Definitely agree here. But most of the time we're seeing Muggles around magical events. I think even the most enthusiastic ones would be slightly disconcerted. And I can't imagine how many times I've laughed condescendingly at Arthur Weasley and his eckeltricity. So I think JKR is being realistic. Wizards are condescending when Muggles can't understand magic, depite the fact that they probably couldn't get along very well with Muggle technology. Becky __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 17:38:18 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:38:18 -0000 Subject: "Cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war ..." In-Reply-To: <9uqotg+pdbk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uquqa+t5ah@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31069 I said: > > On [...] the day Voldemort was defeated, nearly every > > witch and wizard in Britain celebrated -- they were ecstatic enough > > to let their guards slip, for just one moment. Why ? Because, > despite > > any disagreements on policy or on strategy, most wizards wanted to > > see Voldemort defeated, even if they didn't know how it was ever > > going to happen. Joshua Dyal responded: > I believe you're painting with too broad a brush here. Just because > everyone? was excited to see Voldemort defeated doesn't mean they > were unilaterally united against him. They would be just as excited > if they tried just to stay out of the way, which I imagine most > wizards may well have done, rather than actively opposing him. First, note that I said "most wizards." I didn't say "everyone." Second, I also said "most wizards wanted to *see* Voldemort defeated" [emphasis added]. I certainly didn't intend to suggest that they were necessarily "united" as fighters. I don't think I said or suggested that all wizards were "united" in their desire to march, shoulder to shoulder, into the fray. (Hee hee, a little 'Mary Poppins' there for all you nice folks out there. :-) ) I agree; a lot of people -- including myself -- are perfectly happy to have other, more brave souls handle the rough, hand-to-hand stuff. That doesn't mean that I don't have a stake in, or don't care about, the result. And it certainly doesn't mean I don't have an opinion about what's going on. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From ftah3 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 17:00:55 2001 From: ftah3 at yahoo.com (ftah3) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 17:00:55 -0000 Subject: Wormtail Has NO Intention Of Saving Harry In-Reply-To: <9uq47i+mqfk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uqsk7+iusk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31070 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "luminary_extraordinaire" wrote: > Wormtail will NOT "feel the need" to save Harry's life. Wormtail > will NOT "try" to jump Voldemort or protect Harry. He has not risk > his life to save Harry before, and he will NEVER willingly risk his > own life to save Harry. Certainly he had been reluctant to capture > Harry for reviving Voldemort, but that is only because he did not > want to invite a confrontation with Harry's many powerful protectors > (e.g., Dumbledore, Black, Lupus.) Wormtail has only ONE interest in > his heart: his self-preservation. Everything he has done serves ONE > purpose: to save his own skins. It is faulty to assume that Wormtail > has any sort of redeeming quality, that he will redeem himself with > an ultimate noble sacrifice and be "forgiven". While such sacrifice > favors the core values of Judeo-Christianity, it is inconsistent with > Wormtail's characterization, it undermines the continuity of > Wormtail's character development. > When Wormtail saves Harry, it will NOT be a willing nor noble act. > Wormtail will NOT willingly or selflessly save Harry. We know > Wormtail will play a part in "helping" (not necessarily saving) > Harry in some way, but the help will be quite accidental and > unexpected. FATE, not Wormtail, will dictate his action in aiding > Harry. In the classical mythological context, it is FATE--NOT the > will of men--that binds life debt. Hmm. I dunno. I think that in terms of classical mythology, Rowling's stories highlight the 'making of choices' theme. Also, I don't know that Wormtail is incapable of choosing to help Harry, nor that saving Harry from Voldemort in some way would undermine the continuity of Wormtail's character development at all. Wormtail is a very weak-willed being. He follows the 'big guys,' tagging along with James/Sirius/Remus in school, and then throwing in with Voldemort later. He put himself in the protective hands of the Weasleys while a rat, as a 'pet.' He runs back to Voldemort to escape Sirius/Azkaban when his ruse is discovered. Throughout GoF, he's Voldemort's servant. So yes, very self-serving, not too terribly indicative of redeeming qualities, on the face of it. But I still think Wormtail could choose to help Harry while remaining in character, and *possibly* by that choice show some redeeming quality. 1. Character. His character in PoA was set as supremely wimpy and self-serving. He doesn't disprove this in GoF, but we get an added character detail during some of his interactions with Voldemort. On the one hand, he stays with Voldemort even though he's disgusted by him; fears Voldemort; and would rather Voldemort leave Harry be and use some other wizard to reconstitute himself. On the other hand, we begin to see that while he is subserviant to an alarming degree, he *does* expect some gratitude. He gets very petulant about the fact that Voldemort ignores his service and puts down his intelligence. He even has the guts, bolstered by this feeling of unfairness, to actually point out to LV that hey, *he* found Voldemort in the middle of no where when no one else did. Little Peter wants credit for his work, and LV shows *no* sign of ever giving it to him (other than replacing his shorn hand with a nifty strong silver one ~ back to that in a moment). This grates on Wormtail. Also, that hand. Wow, did Wormtail love that powerful, gleaming hand, and Rowling actually takes the time to tell us so. I think that little Peter didn't follow around the big guys just for the protection, but also for the power. And now he *has* some power. Also in PoA, we learn that he *isn't* stupid ~ he pulled of the ruse that framed Sirius ~ used a clever combination of timing and magic. He might be wimpy & lacking in self-confidence, but he's not incompetent. Combine possible growing anger/bitterness toward LV, and early signs of being brave enough to speak out about it + new power in the form of that new hand and a proven mental cleverness...I think Wormtail has the beginnings of a mini-revolt brewing in him. 2. Redemption. I don't know that he's got redemption in him. It will depend on the circumstances in which he helped Harry. I really don't see him defecting from LV and spending several books helping the Good Guys fight LV. I do think, that in a split-second circumstance, and seeing that LV is on the losing end of a battle, Wormtail would throw in with Harry. Not very redemptive. On the other hand, if it came down to a struggle between LV and Harry which could go either way simply dependent on the intervention of one Peter Pettigrew...I think LV would have sunk his own boat by not giving Wormtail credit before. I think that Peter *could* in fact choose to help Harry. But still, not very redemptive. I guess I think that it is within the scope of Peter/Wormtail to choose to help Harry, but that considering his character as we know it so far, it wouldn't be so much a choice between good & evil as it would be lashing out against Voldemort. Though, granted, we potentially have 3 more books to learn the in's and out's of Peter "Wormtail" Pettigrew's character. There may be good in him we haven't yet seen. Sorry if that was rambly. Mahoney From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Fri Dec 7 17:59:23 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:59:23 -0500 Subject: Snape as Harry's protector References: <1007692150.17375.6446.m2@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C11037B.D1D10ECC@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31071 Heather and others (including myself) have been discussing a possible "guardian" role for Snape, as part of what motivates his behavior toward Harry. Last night, while continuing to reread PoA, I found, in the Shrieking Shack scene, this quote: "SILENCE! I WILL NOT BE SPOKEN TO LIKE THAT!" Snape shrieked, looking madder than ever. "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck; you should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have been well served if he'd [Sirius] killed you! You'd have died like your father, too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black -- now get out of the way, or I will *make you*." Just imagine: back before Voldemort's fall, Snape hears that James is considering using Sirius as a Secret Keeper. (This assumes that he was in Dumbledore's deep confidence even at this time.) Snape argues against it, on the grounds that Sirius had tried to get him [Snape] killed at least once, and isn't trustworthy. James picks Sirius (as far as Snape knows) anyway, over Snape's vehement protests. (Possibly Snape had even volunteered to be the Secret-Keeper himself, though I doubt it, as he was routinely in too much danger.) Sirius (apparently) betrays James -- Snape hears about it when Voldemort does, and tries *again* to warn James, at great personal risk, but probably with his usual lack of social grace, and James blows him off (knowing that Sirius isn't the Secret-Keeper, anyway). James & Lily get killed, and Snape is left "knowing" that he was right about Sirius all along. (Remember, even Dumbledore thinks Sirius was the Secret-Keeper.) He's missed his chance to pay off that ridiculous debt he owes James, and now he's stuck being at least somewhat responsible for the safety of James' orphaned son, who wouldn't *be* an orphan if that pig-headed James had only listened. He stews over this for the next ten years. Then the kid shows up at Hogwarts and (from Snape's point of view) has the same stubborn, arrogant conviction as his father that he can choose his own friends, thanks, and that rules don't apply to him. To my mind, this is a much more powerful motivation for Snape's constant snarling at Harry than anything involving Lily (and I had formerly been in the torch-for-Lily camp). And with the explanations coming to Snape late, at the end of GoF, he may now know that he really does have to reconsider Sirius' role in all this, and therefore, James' actions as well. This could end up changing his opinions of Harry, but I'll bet a major change in Snape's behavior will be a long time coming. He's just not a charming kind of guy. (And, as Rosiewolf pointed out, if he's still a spy, he still has to be careful.) I think this does fit in with Susanna/pigwidgeon37's excellent observations about Snape depending on Dumbledore for his redemption, btw. Dumbledore seems to have sided with Sirius despite Snape's historical complaints against him. Snape seems to take this especially badly, at the end of PoA. Sorry about all the ()s. :) One last question: if Peter was the Secret Keeper, how come Sirius knew where the Potters' house was? Maybe because Snape had already gotten that info to Dumbledore, as proof that the Fidelius Charm had been broken? Elizabeth From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 18:10:03 2001 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:10:03 -0000 Subject: All things Snape plus Harry In-Reply-To: <95774A6A6036D411AFEA00D0B73C864303B0566C@exmc3.urmc.rochester.edu> Message-ID: <9ur0ls+a06a@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31072 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Hillman, Lee" wrote: >Some of this may > duplicate the Snape VFAQ, and none of it is "official," but I >merely hope to > give everyone some things to think about. Maybe one day the new book will be out and we can think of new things to talk about. Until then I guess we will just have to keep repeating ourselves. Great thoughts. Now on to the great Potions Master: > > 1. Snape as DE/Snape as spy Let me start off by saying I'm still on the fence as far as this is concerned. >To > summarize, this question ties in to Snape's past and the all- >important Task > that Dumbledore sends him to do in "The Parting of the Ways." Is it to > resume his role as a double agent? But how can that be? > Here's my opinion on the matter--it's evolved a bit since I last made noise > on this topic. I believe that when Snape originally joined the Death Eaters, > he was sincere. I do believe that Snape could go back to being a spy. That was the very first thing I thought of at the end of GoF. Dumbledore was apprehensive and I believe it was because Snape was going somewhere that put him in danger. As far as Snape being sincere when he joined the DE's, he probably was. Maybe he just didn't realize exactly what he was joining. Not really sure what to think about this. >He believed in their cause and went and did horrible things > along with the worst of them. I know many people agree with you here. I just have a bit of a problem believing that Snape actually committed murder or tortured anyone. Regardless of why he left the DE's, surely Dumbledore would never hire a past murderer to teach young kids. I guess I'm hoping that Snape was truly unaware of what he was joining. >Or maybe there's some unrequited or rejected love issues (hmph). Let's hope not. I'm don't care for the unrequited or rejected love stories. > As far as the PS business with Quirrell, Voldemort must have had reasons for > not revealing himself to Severus at that time. Perhaps because Voldemort is not exactly sure whether Snape is still loyal to him for reasons we just don't know yet. > I believe that Voldemort didn't want to reveal himself to any loyal >servants > until he was more substantial than a disembodied spirit taking up >residence > as an extra face on the back of some random dude's head. I think if Voldemort felt he could truly trust Snape, he would have revealed himself regardless of his appearance. What better person to turn to than a former DE with great knowledge in the dark arts and potions? >I believe that had Quirrell succeeded and got the stone for >Voldemort, > he would have been quick enough to stake his claim on Snape's >loyalty. I think he didn't stake a claim on Snape's loyalty because he isn't sure where Snape stands. I guess I belong to the camp that believes Snape is the one who has left forever. "One, who I believe has left me forever..." It's almost as if Voldemort isn't sure about this DE. > Why is it so important that Snape be able to worm his way back into > Voldemort's good graces? Because tactically, at the end of GoF, there is no > other course of action I can conceive that does him or Dumbledore any more > good than going back to be a spy again. I don't have a problem with Snape going back as a spy. However, I imagine that there are ways that Snape could help Dumbledore that JKR could come up with. She seems to be pretty good at bringing up new and exciting ideas. >If he does NOT, he openly declares > that his loyalty has shifted and all kinds of bad things happen. >First of > all, he becomes a marked man. Secondly, the Slytherin students whose parents > are involved will no longer trust him, so he certainly ceases to be a > sounding board for them. Third, Dumbledore is once again left without a > source of information from Voldemort's camp. I would love to be able to see Snape in Voldemort's camp and his interaction with other DE's. But there are other spies besides Snape. >Fourth, he can't use Severus > any other way because the DE's will be looking for him, so he'd >become a > virtual prisoner at Hogwarts. I can see your point. >In both cases, the DE's in question can expect to be > punished, I'm sure Snape is very much aware of that ;-) If Snape did go back as a spy I would love to be able to see his first meeting with Voldemort. > Other theories about the task abound. Polyjuice potion I don't like that theory at all. > contacting some > other group such as vampires or Dementors, even setting up safehouses are > possibilities for his task. But does any one of those do anything to > singularly and unequivocally both secure Snape's life for the time being AND > give Dumbledore a tactical leg up in the battle? Maybe these things would help Dumbledore. After all Hagrid is sent to the giants. Could the vampires not be of some assistance to the good side? I'm sure Voldemort won't hesitate to go after every creature he can think of. GoF "I shall have all my devoted servants returned to me, and an army of creatures whom all fear..." > Leaving aside that I agree the Ministry will pin the murder of >Cedric on > Crouch Jr., thus making it impractical for Snape to impersonate >him, what > good would using Polyjuice do? Still don't like the Polyjuice. >Not to mention > we've discussed on this list how it seems clear that whatever he goes to do, > he and Dumbledore have had this contingency plan in place for a long time. > Impersonating Crouch because he's available seems like a snap decision, and > this task does not feel like a quick decision of any sort. Well said. IF Snape is going to be impersonating anyone I don't see how it culd be Crouch Jr. > Say he goes to contact the Dementors or the vampires. >And vampires? > We hardly know anything about them in JKR's world. But even if there is a > way for one of these groups to help him in the short run, how does that help > in the long? He still can't have them hanging about in class. He'll still be > "outed" with the DE's. And while the alliance may be helpful, how much of an > edge does that really give Dumbledore? And could that type of negotiation > really have taken less than a week? We don't know much of anything about the vampires. But that doesn't mean they will not play an important part. Snape could still have gone back to Voldemort and be a part of the vampire world. Or perhaps Snape turned his back on the vampire world and now has to go back and make amends. I still believe he is one :-) Plus, who is to say the Snape hasn't been negotiating with his fellow creatures for quite some time? > I remain utterly convinced that reestablishing his "loyalty" to >Voldemort is > Snape's only reasonable alternative as a Task. I'm just waiting to see what it is. Still sitting on the fence. > 2. Marital Status and/or Lovelife > > I hate this theory. I just thought I'd be up front about that. >Nonetheless, > I'll try to be objective. I don't have any problems with Snape being in love or in love at one time. What I have a problem with is "who did Snape love?" > Many listies have speculated as to what exactly made Snape so >bitter and > hateful. As Amanda's husband puts it, "Snape has a Past with a >capital P." > (Thanks, Jan!) So what about that Past made him this way? The 'Past' is probably a combination of things. I think the statement about Snape knowing so much of the dark arts at a young age is a clue. Then that DE past is not a shining part of his life either. > Naturally, say many, it must have been some kind of love lost. >Either he > loved someone who didn't love him back (or he was happy in love and >had it taken away (The Wife Who Died). > Personally, I think his past troubles relate to some abuse in his > upbringing, his move to the DE's an attempt to escape to >something "better," > and his rude awakening afterward to be a slow realisation that they >weren't > all they were cracked up to be, but let's explore this other theory >for a > moment. Maybe a combination of a love who died or who is still alive and his upbringing/DE life. > Okay, we hear from admittedly biased sources (the Marauders) that Snape has > always been a bit... lax, let's call it, on the personal grooming side. All I'm going to say about this is that just because Snape has greasy hair and yellow teeth does not mean he is lax on his grooming. He isn't dirty. If he were we would know about it from the kids. > There's JKR's reaction to a question about Snape's lovelife-- "Who would > want Snape in love with her?" And yet she wanted Alan Rickman for the > celluloid-that-must-not-be-named. So are you saying that because Rickman is playing Snape then there must be some sort of 'love' thing? I won't comment ;-) That's for the movie section. >Lots of teens, male and female, go > through periods where their hygiene is either less than desirable, >or simply > out of their control. Acne, hormonal changes, eating habits, >Some listies have pointed out economic conclusions I don't believe any of the above have anything to do with his appearance. One thing I don't want to see is Snape falling in love and then all of a sudden he has this gorgeous head of hair and has had his teeth fixed. > What I don't get is those people who say that such an occurrence is >what > prompted him to *leave* the DE's. Why would Voldemort order the >deaths of > Snape's loved ones, if he were already working for him? Could be that Voldemort ordered their death *after* finding out that Snape had left him. >An elaborate proving to Lily or whomever that he's really a > good guy at heart? I suppose a case could be built for that, but boy, it's a > stretch, IMO. I think it's a big stretch. Why would Snape want to prove anything to Lily? She's married with a child. Why would he be worried about what she would think? > We're getting to the end, I promise. Only one more thing (and no, >it's not > whether Snape's a vampire. If he isn't a vampire then I still say there is something different/special about Snape. Then there was that bat in the HP movie..... >I can handle that in two words, if you like): > Snape as DADA teacher. > > Again, I believe that this is a student-based rumour and has little basis in > truth. We have the canonical evidence that no one but Lockhart applied for > DADA in CoS. > > However, it's *just possible* that on that occasion, Snape *expected* to be > offered the job and was waiting for it to happen. Immature and way dumb, not > to express interest, but just egotistical enough to be possible. He might > have been testing Dumbledore's trust in him, seeing whether he would be > "thought of" for the job. I have always believed that the whole DADA thing was just a rumor or that if Snape wanted that position it was for the good and not bad. BUT I found this interview with Alan Rickman on 'Snapefans': Message 2943 MMMfanfic Unreel Magazine, issue 19 Oct/Dec Interviewed by Jaspre Bark Q. Can you tell us a little about your character Professor Snape? AR: Well, he's professor of Potions and the current head of Slytherin House at Hogwarts-the school of wizardry that Harry attends, but he harbours a secret ambition to be a Professor of the Dark Arts. He isn't that taken with Harry though, probably because he finds him a little too popular for a first-year pupil, I suppose. I think at heart Snape is basically quite an insecure person, he's always longing to be something else that people will really respect, like a black magician, not just a school master. That's why he envies the popular and successful boys like Harry. He does have his postitive side though, even though Harry's a thorn in his side, he doesn't let it worry him too much.~~~~ So did JKR tell Rickman that Snape wants to be respected and truly does want the DADA job or is he just guessing? Sounds like Rickman knows something we don't. Still I do get the impression that he loves potions but that doesn't mean he wouldn't prefer DADA. > A final note, regarding Snape's status as Head of House. I do think >he's > young, especially among wizards with longer lifespans, but I also >think it > makes sense for him to be Head of House. > One of my pet theories all along has been that Snape is there to >protect the > Slyth kids from their own families, to be on hand as a sounding >board and > confidante in case one of them should begin to fall. anavenc wrote in message 31019: >I also suspect that Snape might be one of Harry's guardians. In one >of the books Harry, pondering on Snape's nasty attitude, has a >sarcasstic thought that Snape is less likely to do something nice > (?) (can't remember what) than "adopt Harry". Maybe, this phrase of >Snape adopting Harry is a hint of a magical bond between these two >which might be revealed in the later books. I also happen to believe one reason that Snape is at Hogwarts is to protect Harry and all the other kids. > There are probably many Snape-related discussions I'm forgetting, or > ignoring, but this has gone on more than long enough. It's time for >me to > shut up. It's never time to shut up about Snape (unless you are one of the many who truly hate the guy). As for Snape and Harry, I still think there is some reason why Snape dislikes Harry so much. Hagrid did change the subject and made a point of saying Snape would never hurt a kid. Why would he say that? Hagrid knows something. Barb wrote in message 30937: >I agree that there definitely could be something besides jealousy of >James, but that Snape's resentment of James probably plays a huge >role. Imagine: the person in school that you absolutely could not >stand. he dies a tragic, horrible death, making him loved that much >more, posthumously. His son, only a year old, manages to defeat >this horrible horrible wizard, consequently becoming the most famous >wizard ever. Everyone knows him, loves him, pities him, etc. And >he looks just like his father. You don't know him, but all you ever >hear about is how great this kid is. Then, then, you get this great >wonderful wizard in your class. Yeah, I can see where Snape's >coming from. I agree with all of the above. I just think there is something else. I don't believe Snape is the bitter, mean, nasty man he is just because of his jealously of James and a love for Lily. There is so much more to this man. Now for Snape and Lucius Malfoy..... Tabouli wrote in message 31031 More Elizabeth: I don't think Snape sees the Malfoys for the threat >they are. Time to wake up and smell the pumpkin juice, in my mind. Tabouli: > Oh no, I think the aroma of pumpkin juice is well and truly lodged >in Snape's nostrils where the Malfoys are concerned. Snape's a very >very suspicious character, for a start, and he surely knows that >Lucius is a Death Eater, and a rich, powerful, clever one. If he >missed a threat that obvious, he'd never be cunning and crafty >enought to play a risky game like spying. I think favouring Draco >is much more likely to be a sneaky subterfuge. I agree with Tabouli. I have never believed that Snape just loves Draco (though I do believe Snape will be there for him) and Lucius. I don't think Lucius has pulled the wool over Snape's eyes into thinking he is no longer a DE. Malfoy hasn't fooled Snape. Not now. Not this time. I could see Lucius Malfoy convincing a young Snape to join the DE's and now Snape is truly wanting to get back at the Malfoys. I don't believe that little move Snape made at the end of GoF at the mention of Malfoy had anything to do with Snape being surprised that Lucius was still a DE. Tabouli also said: >As for Snape leaving Voldemort before James and Lily died and the >reasons therefor (?), those of you who got to the end of my >Unauthorised Biography of Severus Snape.... Sorry, I don't read any fanfic :-) >...is that Snape himself was asked to kill the Potters, and suddenly >realized he couldn't do it (much as he hated James, he knew that >killing James would make Lily hate him forever... Maybe V. did ask Snape to kill the Potters but I don't believe he gave a cows behind about Lily hating him forever unless Severus and Lily are related in some way and that is why he loves her. No LOLLIPOPS for me ;-) Why in the world did Snape become a DE? Why did he leave? Where did he come from? Does he still have any family? Why does he hate Harry? What is his motivation for defeating Voldemort? Is it just because he is a good guy now or does he stand to gain something/someone if Voldemort is finally defeated? Unreel Magazine, issue 19 Oct/Dec Interviewed by Jaspre Bark Q: Can you tell us a little about your character Profesor Snape? AR: Well, he's professor of Potions and the current head of Slytherin House at Hogwarts - the school of wizardry that Harry attends, but he harbours a secret ambition to be a Professor of the Dark Arts. He isn't that taken with Harry though, probably because he finds him a little too popular for a first-year pupil, I suppose. I think at heart Snape is basically quite an insecure person, he's always longing to be something else that people will really respect, like a black magician, not just a school master. That's why he envies the popular and successful boys like Harry. He does have his positive side though, even though Harry's a thorn in his side, he doesn't let it worry him too much. How I do love that character. Koinonia From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 18:11:27 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:11:27 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9uqldb+l410@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur0of+m0bu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31073 I have to say that I find this entire line of discussion fascinating. Usually, people don't get to thinking about the judicial systems of fictional societies, so this is very exciting ! First, though, I have to disagree with those like Susanna and Elizabeth that the only conclusion to be drawn from what little we've seen of the MoM is that it is in fact a dictatorship. First of all, we have precious little information about the governmental structure itself. Second, what little we see takes place during one of the darkest moments in wizard history (more on this later). Third, I don't see the MoM necessarily bearing the hallmarks of a dictatorship, or any sort of autocracy. I know little about political science, so I can't really defend this position very knowledgeably -- anyone out there with a poli sci degree who can elucidate this issue ? It's just that I see no indication whatsoever that Fudge, Crouch, or *anyone* possesses absolute governmental power. (Cindy brought up some good points in this regard.) Susanna said: > > And things get downright scary, at least for someone who has grown up > > in a democracy and sticks to its values, when it comes to > > jurisdiction: There are no independent courts in the British > > wizarding world. Not only that, but the person who in Muggle terms > > would be the Minister of Interior Affairs (Crouch Sr.) acts as judge > > AND public prosecutor in a trial where life sentences to Azkaban are > > at stake. Not to mention that the defendants don't even have a lawyer > > but must defend themselves. Seeing Crouch act as both judge and prosecutor didn't shock me that much, really. I spent two summers in France with my law school's study-abroad program, and we watched a few trials while we were there (I say "few" because they can hear nearly 10 trials in an hour !). In criminal trials in France -- yes, the country of Montesquieu -- only the judges question the defendant. They even have their own "special" police to perform some investigations for them. French avocats (attorneys) and procureurs (prosecutors) do not take as active a role in the trial process as do the American lawyers or British barristers. While this may seem shocking at first (at least to Americans), the reality is that a French defendant is only charged with a crime in the face of overwhelming evidence. Admittedly, this is not always the case in the HP world. Not only that, most sentences are suspended in favor of probation. Again, not the case in HP. And, of course, French judges are not necessarily government ministers. My point was that the role of judge and prosecutor can combine, even in a modern, developed society. However, one has to keep in mind that we are comparing modern legal systems *during peacetime* with three short descriptions of legal proceedings (and, if you count it, Buckbeak's "trial") in the wizard world *during strife*. Even in our supposedly "more enlightened" times, I fail to see many differences between Crouch's way of doing things and FDR's "military commissions" or Bush II's "military tribunals." In fact, I think that JKR is uncanny in her depictions of the reponses of policymakers to the threat of war and the treatment of war criminals. Cindy wrote: > Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. Although now that he's head of the Department of International Magic Cooperation, maybe he's more like an American Secretary of State ? :-) > Cindy (resisting the strong urge to compare Crouch Sr.'s handling of > criminal justice during wartime and John Ashcroft's handling of same) Argh ! Tell me about it !! :-) Like I said, JKR's depictions are *uncanny*. :-) Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From pennylin at swbell.net Fri Dec 7 18:45:00 2001 From: pennylin at swbell.net (Penny & Bryce) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 12:45:00 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding References: <9ur0of+m0bu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C110E2C.7070006@swbell.net> No: HPFGUIDX 31074 Hi everyone -- I desperately want to get involved in this discussion of the wizarding world govt & legal systems but am a bit short on time today. I do, however, want to point out a few quick points: 1. There are a number of wizarding statutes mentioned in the books & the schoolbooks. 2. The existence of statutes certainly indicate that there must be some legislative arm (even if, as susanna I believe noted, is a function being exercised by the executive branch & not a separate branch). The little bit of discussion that we've had on this topic to date can all be found in the Wizarding World Govt FAQ: http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/faq/government.html I hope to jump in at some point -- this is all very fascinating! Penny From theboywholived at backteeth.com Fri Dec 7 18:52:15 2001 From: theboywholived at backteeth.com (Gabriel Rozenberg) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:52:15 +0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31075 I think most US people on-list are in danger of assuming too much that government works the same in the US as everywhere else. There is no doctrine of the separation of powers in Britain, although the independence of the judiciary is if anything greater here than in the US. Moreover, the -- admittedly, reasonable -- US assumption that local deomcratic institutions will exist and run local things just doesn't translate into the mad, confused world of British local government. On the assumption that the wizard governing system takes at least some cues from the UK, some alternative suggestions follow! >Susanna wrote: > > >snip great observations about duties and powers of Minister of >Magic> > > >So far, this wouldn't represent a particular problem, but things get > > a bit more difficult when we turn our attention to the legislative > > body (parliament), which is blatantly absent. Now, there must be >such > > a thing as magical law, because there is a Magical Law Enforcement > > (an analogon to Muggle police), and you can't enforce a law that > > doesn't exist. Well, primitive societies have law without clear legislatures; other societies (eg pre-revolution France) will have legislatures that only meet every few hundred years or whatever. Wizard law could be the sort of thing that doesn't get changed much. Perhaps an Estates-Generale/ Jedi council (/OoP??) might exist, meeting only in times of crisis. A thought. > >I think there *must* be some sort of Magical Congress or Parliament, >but that we just haven't seen it. There are other political figures >you'd expect to see who haven't made an appearance yet. For >instance, one would think someone would be the mayor of Hogsmeade. >But for all of the trips to Hogsmeade and the presence of the >dementors, there is no communication by or appearance of the mayor. Except that lots of towns in Britain don't have mayors. There are hardly any directly elected mayors in this country; though there are quite a few Lord Mayors, who are wholly ceremonial figureheads. Smaller British conurbations tend to be run by an unwieldy mix of parish councils (centred around the local church), town councils and county councils. All of which have overlapping responsibilities. This doesn't matter much since Hogsmeade is clearly a unitary authority operating outside the realms of local GB government; whichever county it's in (the film has somewhere in Yorkshire as I recall but there's of course much evidence that Hogsmeade is in Scotland) will have no control over it. Internally however if it copies other town councils it will be like a little legislature with a dominant coalition in control of policy. Moreover, it will be bureaucratic and yet without little power: see below! >In fact, the notice on the door of Honeydukes in PoA informing >visitors that the dementors will be patrolling is from MoM, not the >local authorities in Hogsmeade. > This is unsurprising, since town councils tend to have their powers usurped by central government in Britain whenever the central government feels like it. THe council is often reduced to the role of implementing orders from on high. The fact that Hogsmeade Town Council seems to have no control over the dementors isn't that surprising. On the other hand, police forces are all local in the UK and there isn't a 'National Guard' as such. So I think the most likely equivalent for the dementors would be the Army, which a town council wouldn't have much say over. >Also, Fudge tells Snape in PoA that he'll try to arrange for Snape to >receive Order of Merlin, First Class, if Fudge can manage it. This >suggests that *someone* has authority over Fudge in these matters -- >probably the wizarding legislature. I don't think Fudge is >necessarily supposed to be a dictator. I think he is just sort of >representative of the most of the government, rolled up into one >person for convenience and simplicity. > All government Ministers have similarly broad powers. If a government minister wanted to get someone knighted, he'd send a note over to the Prime Minister and ask if he could sort it out. It might happen if the PM felt he owed him a favour, etc. Patronage powers in Britain are rather a black book, and many are pretty random. I think here Fudge sounds precisely like someone on a level with other UK Gov ministers. Perhaps he is one. (He tells the PM about Black, so he has some sort of access.) >The other reason I don't think the wizarding world is a dictatorship >is that Crouch Sr. had substantial powers as the Head of Magical Law >Enforcement. He, not the Minister of Magic, made a number of >critical decisions (aurors could use unforgivable curses). Since the >wizarding world was in a war with Voldemort, Crouch Sr.'s power to >direct the war effort suggests that he, not the Minister of Magic, >might be the commander in chief. > Or he could've been in Fudge's War Cabinet. Since Churchill at least the PM in times of war has picked 4 favcoured Cabinet ministers to form an inner cabinet which can make quick decisions. That would give Crouch quite enough influence. We don't really have a singe c-in-c like the US (well we do, but since she's the Queen, and follows the advice of her ministers, whatever that means, executive power can be dispersed through many or held by one depending on circumstance.) >Susanna again: > > > And things get downright scary, at least for someone who has grown >up > > in a democracy and sticks to its values, when it comes to > > jurisdiction: There are no independent courts in the British > > wizarding world. Not only that, but the person who in Muggle terms > > would be the Minister of Interior Affairs (Crouch Sr.) acts as >judge > > AND public prosecutor in a trial where life sentences to Azkaban >are > > at stake. Not to mention that the defendants don't even have a >lawyer > > but must defend themselves. > > > Yes, I don't recognise this as especially British, although the Home Secretary is doing his best to give us Azkabanian justice. So maybe this is a military tribunal as a consequence of a time of war. Against, er, Buckbeak. Hmm. >It is certainly true that due process is, um, truncated in the >wizarding world. Hagrid and Sirius both get hauled off to Azkaban >without trials, and Hagrid went there during peacetime on skimpy >evidence indeed. > >I'm not ready to pronounce wizarding justice as a complete disaster, >though. There were three "trials" in GoF, but only one was really a >trial (Bagman), and the defendant was acquitted. Karkaroff's >pensieve scene wasn't a trial, but an interrogation, and MoM kept up >its end of the plea bargain by releasing him. Crouch Jr.'s >appearance sounds like a crude version of a sentencing, not a trial. >Crouch Sr. says they have heard the evidence, and he asks the >jury "to raise their hands if they believe, as I do, that these >crimes deserve a life sentence in Azkaban." > >I do wonder, however, whether the terrible shortcomings in the >wizarding justice system are by design (to keep it simple)or are just >due to some lack of understanding about how some of these things are >supposed to work. In the U.S., a judge or prosecutor who polls the >jury by stating his or her own personal view of the defendant's guilt >will cause a mistrial. I believe it is also considered bad form to >chain the defendant in the presence of a jury that is deciding the >defendant's fate. I don't know about the British justice system, but >I'd be surprised if British legal proceedings look anything like >these. Does anyone know? > Indeed: in fact trials are much fairer in Britain, since the press is stopped from printing anything which could prejudice the jury; the judge can't overrule the jury's verdict as I think sometimes happens in some US courts; etc. >Susanna again: > > > Which brings us inevitably to the conclusion that the three powers >of > > legislation, executive and jurisdiction are by no means separated, > > but concentrated in one single institution: The Ministry of Magic. > Pretty probable. In the UK the executive controls the legislature anyway. Sad but true. >Hmmm. Well, if the Ministry of Magic is equivalent to the U.S. >government, then it might very well have separation of powers after >all. Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. But he's a minister! Seems unlikely. Although, it has to be said, the Lord Chancellor is a minister and also head of the judiciary, in one of these fabulous hangovers of constitutional history. So maybe. >Fudge >would be head of the executive branch. The "missing links" are the >leaders of the legislative branch, who (in the U.S.) are so dull that >it doesn't surprise me that JKR might decide not to clutter the books >with them. :-) I can't see any need for a strong legislature for wizards. It's a small community. Provided they stick to general laws (eg: wizards shouldn't go round killing muggles, etc) I think the wizarding world is happy to leave the day to day work of standardising cauldrons to the executive. Which reminds me of what I think JKR might have in mind a little with all of Percy's pernickitiness: Brussels/ the European Commission. That's a pretty untrammelled executive if you're looking for one, and it's well known for its ludicrously bureaucratic and soulless international standardisations of commercial products. The parallels stick out a mile. I think that its a pretty straightforward parody, although not one very obvious to US readers perhaps. hmm, only my second post on-list, slightly long I feel -- sorry! Gabriel _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 18:19:12 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:19:12 -0000 Subject: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ur170+37ge@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31076 Hello Other Emily :-), I agree with you, somewhat. I always did wonder if there wasn't anything in the Muggle world that the Muggle-born kids missed. I mean, I could see how the wizarding world was so full of enchantment that one never thought of the "real world" again ... But really -- I'd like to see some indication that Hermione -- maybe even Harry -- reminisces from time to time about that not-as-magical, but-just-as- *nice* Muggle world. Maybe Hermione and some other Muggle-born wizards could start a club - - or a support group. :-) Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From annahunny2000 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 18:40:25 2001 From: annahunny2000 at yahoo.com (annahunny2000) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:40:25 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot Message-ID: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31077 I'm sorry to say I don't think JKR has given us any truly admirable grown-ups, with the arguable exception of Dumbledore, in the first 4 books. The cream of the grown-ups are ineffectual at best. By now it seems obvious that Harry is IT in terms of fighting the evil that could completely consume the wizarding world. Why the heck aren't these folks turning cartwheels to support Harry? Makes for good reading, sure, but doesn't say much for the over-18 set in Potterworld. Dumbledore withholds all kinds of information from Harry which could seriously help in his fight with Voldemort. And if he's the most powerful wizard in the world, why doesn't he just take Harry under his wing, so to speak, and teach Harry what he needs to know while giving him the protection he needs? Or at least say, Hey Harry, I know the Dursleys are eligible for criminal charges in their abusive treatment of you and I know that I put and left you in their care for all these years, and I know you probably need serious counseling after having been locked in a closet every night for over a decade, but you've got to be with a blood relative in order to survive past the age of 16 and I've been way too busy to protect you. Or whatever the reason. And Sirius is, in my opinion, a rather selfish coward who makes for a pathetic god-father. I'd say he should suck it up, be a dog 24-7, and stay by your god-son's side so he doesn't get assassinated. The Weasleys (actually my personal favorite grown-ups) seem to truly care about Harry, but don't do squat to help him -- aside from taking him to a quidditch match. And please, don't even think of Snape as in any way remotely resembling an admirable human being. I truly don't understand how anyone could like a guy who consistently and sadistically picks on powerless kids, no matter how cute the actor who portrays him is. Am I wrong? Maybe I'm ageist, or more likely, just cranky today, but that's my two cents. From gwynyth at drizzle.com Fri Dec 7 18:54:23 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:54:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9uqrkt+itq3@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31078 Another thought, but not really a reply to anyone... It does seem like we have evidence suggestion that there is *not* an obvious civil court system. I don't have GoF with me at the moment, but it seems like if there *were* an obvious civil court option, that Fred and George would have mentioned it re: the whole thing with Bagman. We know that it's not because of minors gambling that they don't pursue it - because their father's reaction to the bet is "Erm, you know your mother wouldn't approve of you losing all your savings.", not something harsher. I think it's likely that if there *were* some option for legal recourse, it'd at least be mentioned in passing somewhere. -Jenett gwynyth at drizzle.com From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 18:58:42 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:58:42 -0000 Subject: HP and the Eightfold Path In-Reply-To: <200112062232.RAA18815@gaea.East.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <9ur3h3+4utn@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31079 > Heck, I'd like to do an analysis > from the Eightfold Path (a Buddhist text), but I don't have time for that, > either. As someone with devout Buddhist parents and who has sat in on a number of teachings and practices over the last ten years, I would tend to balk at drawing parallels between the tenets of the Eightfold Path and the lessons in HP simply because they have different aims. As you and David acknowledged, the book is infused with the philosophies of secular humanism: "To thine own self be true" and that sort of thing. However, Buddhism advocates the entirely opposite message. The Eightfold Path is merely a simplified description of the path to the realization of the true nature of reality. That reality is that there is no concept of self. Indeed, there is no self to which one needs to be true ! I would say that Buddhism and humanism do have a number of similar ideas, particularly in the concept of one's choices having great effects on one's life and the lives of others (i.e. karma). However, in the end, Buddhism is not just about teaching virtue and compassion -- one also needs to have faith that one's good deeds generate good karma for the future fate of all beings and that in the end, all beings will ultimately come to realize our Buddha-nature, i.e. that the world, our existence as separate beings, is merely an illusion. (My apologies for my rather awkward explanation.) While JKR is doubtlessly working to show how our choices and actions affect our future, and that good results come from good thoughts and good actions, I don't think the ultimate message is that the main aim in life is to shatter the concept of self-duality. I mean, I doubt Harry will attain nirvana by Book 7. :-) Anyway, I think that approaching HP through the Eightfold Path, especially without an eye towards what the Eightfold Path really intends to lead you, would be no more than superficial, and wouldn't really get to the heart of what Buddhism is really about. That's just my feeling, however. Do what you will with it, of course. That's just my two Knuts, and I'm sure there are more devout Buddhists out there who would disagree with me. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Fri Dec 7 17:56:41 2001 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:56:41 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wormtail Has NO Intention Of Saving Harry Message-ID: <115.8f9e3aa.29425cd9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31080 In a message dated 12/7/01 5:31:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, ktchong73 at yahoo.com writes: > Wormtail will NOT "feel the need" to save Harry's life. Wormtail > will NOT "try" to jump Voldemort or protect Harry. He has not risk > his life to save Harry before, and he will NEVER willingly risk his > own life to save Harry. Oy...I wrote that whole post more than half asleep, not thinking-and I guess I REALLY wasn't being clear. Mind, I thought I was being clear at the time. Anyway, that little part was entirely theory (and very out there). The more I see things now-the more I doubt what I theorized before. I see everyone jumping infront of Harry-all with different reasons (not all together though-what I'm saying is for everyone who I can imagine jumping in to save Harry-I can give some kind of reason.) I agree though, that in Wormtail probably won't be the one to save Harry. I'd be suprised. I can see him finally cracking and wanting Voldemort to stop. Of course, actually doing something to stop LV seems a bit unWormtailish, but it is always the thought that counts, ne? ^-^ ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 19:15:56 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:15:56 -0000 Subject: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9upj6q+b4pa@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur4hc+v65d@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31081 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > This is a theory that deserves further exploration, but at the moment I'm a little skeptical simply because one would think Dumbledore would have time-turned a whole hit squad to the house to be there when LV arrived. I don't think that would work. It seems that the time turner can't change the past. Since Dumbledore already knew that the Potters *had* died, he couldn't go back in time and prevent it. Seems that Rowlings' time travel theory is a bit different from some other sci-fi authors. Joshua Dyal From keegan at mcn.org Fri Dec 7 19:26:32 2001 From: keegan at mcn.org (Catherine Keegan) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 11:26:32 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ways to kill a wizard In-Reply-To: <9uqt7e+keeu@eGroups.com> References: <9uqiie+1cl7@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20011207112142.00b4fb60@mail.mcn.org> No: HPFGUIDX 31082 At 05:11 PM 12/7/01 +0000, Dave Witley wrote: >--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > > Hmmm. There seems to be conflicting canon evidence about whether > > wizards can die in the usual way. > >I have always found it puzzling that Neville could survive being >dropped out of a window unharmed... I don't know about you folks, but I survived a bunch of stuff as a kid that would have damaged me a lot more as an adult. Kids survive all sorts of falls, near drownings, beatings, etc... all the time. For such fragile creatures, they're incredibly tough. I suspect a car crash could easily kill a wizard. They are still humans, maybe they're tougher in some ways, but they're mortal. Catherine in California From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 19:39:53 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:39:53 -0000 Subject: Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World; Grindelwald In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ur5u9+fe22@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31083 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jenett wrote: > (I'd point out that we really don't know much about how Grindewald came to > power, or how his minions, if there were minions, might have been > recruited. It may be that they were all clearly guilty (assuming that > Grindewald had minions), and there weren't issues of people acting under > the Imperious curse, and so on which complicate the Voldemort issues. > Basically, we don't have much real data on the most recent pre- Voldemort > Dark Wizard who might have produced lots of trials. Or might not have. We > don't know.) There's also the possibility (given Grindelwald's name) that his action did not take place in Britain, and therefore did not involve the British Ministry of Magic. BTW, what does Grindelwald mean? I know that wald is German for forest, and Grindel sounds suspiciously like the monstrous villain in Beowulf. Odd name for a wizard, though, either way. Joshua Dyal From amendels at lynx.neu.edu Fri Dec 7 19:47:53 2001 From: amendels at lynx.neu.edu (auroraalma) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:47:53 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur6d9+imip@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31084 annahunny wrote: > I'm sorry to say I don't think JKR has given us any truly admirable > grown-ups, with the arguable exception of Dumbledore, in the first 4 > books. The cream of the grown-ups are ineffectual at best. By now > it seems obvious that Harry is IT in terms of fighting the evil that > could completely consume the wizarding world. Why the heck aren't > these folks turning cartwheels to support Harry? Makes for good > reading, sure, but doesn't say much for the over-18 set in > Potterworld. I do agree with you. But, at the risk of jumping back into the 'Is this a kids' book?/ Is there really any liturature that is children's literature ?, etc.' discussion, which I enjoyed reading here, I find that this is very common in kids' books. The heroes are often orphans, often away at boarding school, or stranded somewhere without adults. Think of the Narnia books, where mentor-like adults ae few and far between. (several other examples come to mind) Perhaps this is unrealisitic (the lack of adult intervention/ responsibility), but I think J.K. Rowling know what she is doing. That is, I think this is the kind of book that children and teenagers like to read. In real life, kids know that they are too powerless to do so many things without adults, so it is gratifying and empowering to read about a world where it is the kids who fight the good fight and are the heroes. How would it change the book if Harry knew that no matter what happened dumbledore would be there to stop Voldemort at the last second or always knew what was going on so whatever HRH found out wouldn't be that important? Aurora From raolin1 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 19:59:35 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:59:35 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur738+3fur@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31085 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "annahunny2000" wrote: > And Sirius is, in my opinion, a rather selfish coward who makes for a > pathetic god-father. I'd say he should suck it up, be a dog 24-7, > and stay by your god-son's side so he doesn't get assassinated. I'm not sure if that would really be for the best. How, exactly, does a dog -- even if he is a wizard (without a wand) -- help? He can't really stay around Hogwarts or Privet Drive any better than he did. He did rush to Harry as soon as he got out (although revenge for James and Lily seemed to be a stronger driver than protection of Harry) and as for sucking it up: he's sucked it up harder than anyone else in the Potterverse that we know of. Twelve years in Azkaban and then two years of living off rats as a big black dog? How exactly does that jive with a selfless coward? Joshua Dyal From fourfuries at aol.com Fri Dec 7 20:08:06 2001 From: fourfuries at aol.com (four4furies) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 20:08:06 -0000 Subject: HP and the Eightfold Path In-Reply-To: <9ur3h3+4utn@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur7j6+jpqc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31086 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Edith Chen" wrote: > As someone with devout Buddhist parents and who has sat in on a > number of teachings and practices over the last ten years, I would > tend to balk at drawing parallels between the tenets of the Eightfold > Path and the lessons in HP simply because they have different aims. > As you and David acknowledged, the book is infused with the > philosophies of secular humanism: "To thine own self be true" and > that sort of thing. It is highly debatable that HP turns on Humanist notions of "to thine own self be true". Tom Riddle has done a very nice job of being true to himself, having achieved several of his life long goals, but I don't think any of us confuse his success with merit. > However, Buddhism advocates the entirely opposite message. The > Eightfold Path is merely a simplified description of the path to >the realization of the true nature of reality. That reality is that >there is no concept of self. Indeed, there is no self to which one >needs to be true ! > I would say that Buddhism and humanism do have a number of similar > ideas, particularly in the concept of one's choices having great > effects on one's life and the lives of others (i.e. karma). Here we begin to recognize the problem with trying to express in language the inexpressable concepts of divinity, eternity, the ultimates of Good and Evil, etc. Is there really any difference between the "forms" of Plato, the "ideals" of the Humanist, the "Salvation" of the Judeo/Christian or the Nirvana of the Buddhist? I submit to you that there is no difference. Either there is a truth or there is not. If there is, it cannot be expressed. If there is not, why do we waste our time seeking it? > While JKR is doubtlessly working to show how our choices and >actions affect our future, and that good results come from good >thoughts and good actions, I don't think the ultimate message is >that the main aim in life is to shatter the concept of self-duality. >I mean, I doubt Harry will attain nirvana by Book 7. :-) I agree it may take him longer than his seven years at Hogwarts for Harry to achieve nirvana, but JKR has shown Harry and us what a Bhoddisatva looks, like in the person of Albus Dumbledore, and she showed him off in the very first pages. 4FR (regaining his sense of and joy in the infinite, after looking into the abyss) From LenMachine at aol.com Fri Dec 7 20:13:47 2001 From: LenMachine at aol.com (lenmachine) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 20:13:47 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9ur7tr+nshj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31087 Jenett wrote: > It does seem like we have evidence suggestion that there is *not* an > obvious civil court system. I don't have GoF with me at the moment, but it > seems like if there *were* an obvious civil court option, that Fred and > George would have mentioned it re: the whole thing with Bagman. I don't have GoF on me either, but I don't think that a failure to mention something in passing counts as "evidence" suggesting that the thing therefore does not exist. (Can we get a L.O.O.N ruling on this one ? :-) ) Anyway, I'm a lawyer (well, OK, an unemployed one), and unless I'm talking about something in particular, I rarely mention the civil system "in passing." :-) On the other hand, we have Buckbeak's hearing in PoA to suggest that at the very least administrative-type hearings exist. Not only that, appeals are available. And lest someone criticize the impartiality of the ministers involved in *that* proceeding, let's not forget that Lucius Malfoy wasn't shown to have actually bribed the judges. Influenced them, yes. Believe me, it happens in the real world often enough -- rich people hire rich lawyers (heck, Lucius Malfoy probably *is* a lawyer. :-) ), and unpopular groundskeepers have to appear pro se. And more often than not, the rich guys win. That's a fact of life HRH have learned. Sincerely, Emily A. Chen From aiz24 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 20:19:46 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (lupinesque) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 20:19:46 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur892+l50s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31088 Annahunny wrote: > The cream of the grown-ups are ineffectual at best. cough*RemusLupin*cough I think there is some truth in what you say, and my guess is that the grownups in HP suffer from the authorial need to put children at the center of this drama. As a reader, I don't want the grownups to step in and take charge; I'm enjoying watching these kids handle things. Dumbledore can show up and save the day as long as he doesn't ruin the story. That said, reports of the grownups' inefficacy are greatly exaggerated. There are solid reasons why Harry has to live with the Dursleys and why Dumbledore can't tell him everything that's going on; in the latter case, it seems likely that the more Harry knows, the worse off he'll be. There are real-life exigencies that prevent Lupin from sticking around to save the day; ditto Sirius. That much is very realistic. In our world, the adults who ought to run things and seem so omnipotent to children are prevented from doing all they might: by illness and prejudice (Lupin), by early death (James and Lily), by the threat of death (Sirius). In our world, kids have to grow up "too fast" because the grownups who want to protect them aren't omnipotent. Things are no different for the wizarding world. > Dumbledore withholds all kinds of information from Harry which could > seriously help in his fight with Voldemort. And if he's the most > powerful wizard in the world, why doesn't he just take Harry under > his wing, so to speak, and teach Harry what he needs to know while > giving him the protection he needs? Well, which is it? Should Harry be granted a normal life to the greatest extent possible, in which case the adults should conceal most of the truth from him and let him go along blithely for as long as he can, or should he be instructed that like it or not, he's on the front lines, and trained up in the Warrior mode? We'll have to see as things unfold, but it looks as if Dumbledore recognizes that Harry will continue to be at the center of any conflict with Voldemort, but that he doesn't want him to be there until he's older and closer to ready--in terms of magical strength and emotional strength. He needs to know his place in this world, and fate (not Dumbledore) has made it impossible for him to begin to learn it until age 11. Now he's playing catch-up. There is real ambivalence among the adults about whether he should be at the center. Sirius, predictably, wants to protect him; he urges Harry to get on with the tournament and not play detective, is horrified and angry about his ordeal at the end of GF, wants Harry not to have to retell the story of what happened in the graveyard, etc. He doesn't give a damn about anyone's desire to have Harry the hero--he wants this child to have protection and, as far as possible, a normal life ("Let him have a sleep. Let him rest," GF 36). But he himself is a soldier in this conflict, and needs to balance that role with his godfather role (hence his departure, despite reluctance, in GF 36--"You'll see me very soon, Harry . . . I promise you. But I must do what I can, you understand, don't you?"). As for protecting Harry from assassination, it's not a simple matter of staying in dog form; the Death Eaters know that he is an Animagus and so sticking around means taking a serious risk of being discovered either by them or (via a tip-off) by the MOM. Sirius reluctantly leaves Harry in the care of Dumbledore and Hogwarts, where he believes that he is as safe as he would be anywhere--"[Voldemort] cannot hope to lay hands on you while you are under Dumbledore's protection" (GF 31). He does nevertheless take a great risk in hiding in the cave, and urges Harry to be cautious. There are a few things going on with Dumbledore. One is that I am not convinced Dumbledore knows how central Harry will continue to be. He doesn't know the future; he has hopes that Harry will not have to be the wizarding world's champion, even though those hopes are fading. (I could have this totally wrong. Books 5-7 will probably tell.) Beyond that question, Dumbledore is of two minds and settles them by slowly introducing Harry to his role. He largely wants to protect him, and is clearly shocked and horrified by the events of GF, from the choice of Harry as Champion to the Portkey out of the protection of Hogwarts. On the other hand, in both PS/SS and CS he allows, even encourages, Harry to take on Voldemort. I think we are seeing the training of a leader here. Harry, not Professor McGonagall, not Snape, is to be the next Dumbledore, the next greatest wizard of his era, so it's Harry who gets the hint about pursuing the Chamber clues (CS 14). (In that chapter, I hasten to note, Dumbledore doesn't sic him on Riddle; he directs him to remain loyal and seek help--it's coincidence and Harry's own pigheadedness that keep him from seeking it in the obvious place, namely McGonagall or such, so that when he finally asks for help no one but Dumbledore himself [that is, his agent Fawkes and the sword] is there to answer.) Thanks to this off-the-cuff training, by the time he faces Voldemort again in GF, an encounter emphatically *not* hoped-for, still less planned-for, by Dumbledore, Harry is ready in a way he could not have been without the previous crises. He thinks as much a year and a half earlier: "Did they think he couldn't look after himself? He'd escaped Lord Voldemort three times, he wasn't completely useless . . ." (PA 4). He is slowly accumulating experience, confidence, and know-how to add to his native courage. I believe that the graveyard scene is a quantum leap beyond Halloween 1981, the confrontation with Voldemort in PS/SS, or the realization of his links to Voldemort in CS in teaching Harry that he has a unique role to play (his unique wand being a symbol of this fact), but would we want Dumbledore or anyone else to have dumped this load of bricks on him at age 11? In June 1995, he is ready in a way that he would not have been four years earlier. Amy Z ------------------------------------------------- December 7 It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us; that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. -Abraham Lincoln -------------------------------------------------- From Jefrigo21 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 19:38:02 2001 From: Jefrigo21 at aol.com (Jefrigo21 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 14:38:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot Message-ID: <141.5f1b4a6.2942749a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31089 annahunny2000 at yahoo.com Writes And Sirius is, in my opinion, a rather selfish coward who makes for a pathetic god-father. I'd say he should suck it up, be a dog 24-7, and stay by your god-son's side so he doesn't get assassinated. The Weasleys (actually my personal favorite grown-ups) seem to truly care about Harry, but don't do squat to help him -- aside from taking him to a quidditch match. And please, don't even think of Snape as in any way remotely resembling an admirable human being. I truly don't understand how anyone could like a guy who consistently and sadistically picks on powerless kids, no matter how cute the actor who portrays him is. Am I wrong? Maybe I'm ageist, or more likely, just cranky today, but that's my two cents. ______________________________________________ You got to be kidding about Sirius, he is in danger himself. He has to be careful no matter what. He can be killed anytime. This Godfather thing is a old new concept for him give the guy a break, please?? The Weasly's they ask Dumbledore if he can stay with them. Remember he had to start off the summer with the Dursley's Snape is Snape, and he is somewhat different than what we are used to. I do not know but he will be a bit different. Remember this is the book not the movie, it is only fiction. From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 20:27:29 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:27:29 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Who saw the time travellers? In-Reply-To: <9uq48b+beep@eGroups.com> References: <9uq48b+beep@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <19654752130.20011207122729@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31090 Fang is who I had in mind, though the points that others have brought up about who saw them are valid. -- Dave From Calypso8604 at aol.com Fri Dec 7 20:39:14 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:39:14 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot Message-ID: <149.5e3b6d5.294282f2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31091 In a message dated 12/7/2001 2:09:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, annahunny2000 at yahoo.com writes: > Dumbledore withholds all kinds of information from Harry which could > seriously help in his fight with Voldemort. And if he's the most > powerful wizard in the world, why doesn't he just take Harry under > his wing, so to speak, and teach Harry what he needs to know while > giving him the protection he needs? Well, Dumbledore obvioudly thinks its all for Harry's own good. And Dumbledore is teaching Harry what he needs to know, but wuthout obviously handing him the information. He makes it so Harry can discover everything he needs himself. Or at least say, Hey Harry, I > know the Dursleys are eligible for criminal charges in their abusive > treatment of you and I know that I put and left you in their care for > all these years, and I know you probably need serious counseling > after having been locked in a closet every night for over a decade, > but you've got to be with a blood relative in order to survive past > the age of 16 and I've been way too busy to protect you. Or whatever > the reason. I'm sure the Dursleys beat being killed by Voldemort. We know that there's a reason Harry stays there, we just are uninformed as to what it is And Sirius is, in my opinion, a rather selfish coward who makes for a > pathetic god-father. I'd say he should suck it up, be a dog 24-7, > and stay by your god-son's side so he doesn't get assassinated. So, Sirius should risk being caught and recieving the Dementor's Kiss just so he can watch Harry when Dumbledore is doing just that? If Sirius stayed a dog all the time the secret would bound to get out and then he'll be less of a help when he is souless. Besides, Harry can't suddenly have a dog when they probably aren't allowed in Hogwarts (save Fang--but he belongs to Hagrid not a busy student) > > The Weasleys (actually my personal favorite grown-ups) seem to truly > care about Harry, but don't do squat to help him -- aside from taking > him to a quidditch match. I believe the Weasleys tried to persuade Dumbledore to let Harry stay with them but the decision was out of their hands. > > And please, don't even think of Snape as in any way remotely > resembling an admirable human being. I truly don't understand how > anyone could like a guy who consistently and sadistically picks on > powerless kids, no matter how cute the actor who portrays him is. > Snape isn't really that bad. I've had worse teachers in elementary school! In fact, there was even a nun who taught Sunday School when I was 8 that made me cry everday...Snape is certainly a great guy when compared to many teachers. I like Snape because I see his potential and obvious depth There are many other admirable adults in the series. The Potters for ceratin, Minerva, Remus Lupin, the real Mad-Eye, the older Weasley boys....All good adults, IMHO Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From titacats at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 20:45:13 2001 From: titacats at yahoo.com (titacats) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 20:45:13 -0000 Subject: Snape as Harry's protector (Was: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9up8cm+mm57@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ur9op+me1u@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31092 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "anavenc" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "heathernmoore" wrote: > Maybe Snape's infamous threat to feed Harry Veritasserum is the cry of > desperation: I NEED to know what you are up to, so that I could get > some control of the situation. LOL That image just made me crack up. > > Of course, Harry's mistrust of Snape is the result of Snape's nasty > classroom attitude. It was ruthlessly provoked by Snape at their very > first meeting. Why, I wonder, Snape chose to alienate Harry ? If he > is indeed Harry' guardian, he just brought much trouble on himself. > > Any thoughts? In a previous post someone already made the point of why Snape dislikes Harry so I won't go into that. Basically I think that Snape just can't escape his own feelings towards Harry at this point and things just go downhill from there. Cats From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 21:09:25 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:09:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as Harry's protector (Was: Snape/Harry/Sirius Nov 1, 1981 In-Reply-To: <9ur9op+me1u@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207210925.87837.qmail@web20805.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31093 --- titacats wrote: > In a previous post someone already made the point of > why Snape > dislikes Harry so I won't go into that. Basically I > think that Snape > just can't escape his own feelings towards Harry at > this point and > things just go downhill from there. Of course Harry hasn't done a single thing to help the situation either. At the very least he could have thanked Snape for saving his life, (Quidditch Match in SS) and maybe even apologized for suspecting him. I can't help feeling a little acknowledgement, however grudging, of Snape's efforts on his behalf from Harry might have defused some of his, (Snape's) resentment and led to a slightly better relationship. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From gwynyth at drizzle.com Fri Dec 7 20:22:53 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:22:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9ur7tr+nshj@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31094 On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, lenmachine wrote: > I don't have GoF on me either, but I don't think that a failure to > mention something in passing counts as "evidence" suggesting that the > thing therefore does not exist. (Can we get a L.O.O.N ruling on this > one ? :-) ) > > Anyway, I'm a lawyer (well, OK, an unemployed one), and unless I'm > talking about something in particular, I rarely mention the civil > system "in passing." :-) The passage I'm thinking of *is* a place where it'd be appropriate to mention it if it existed as an option, though. It's where Fred and George finally get forced to explain why they're trying to track down Bagman, and what the whole situation is. They go through the whole "We tried this, and we tried that, and we can't get this to work..." but they don't, as I recall, mention anything formal (like a civil court system) even to discard it as an option for some other reason. (like "Mom would find out and she'd be angry we gambled.") It struck me as odd even the first time I read it, which is part of why it stuck in my head. I can check the actual passage tonight, though. I'd have expected someone in the US, for example, to say "I don't want to deal with the bother of going through civil court" or something like that, but at least to acknowledge it as an option. -Jenett From scmacdonald at carlson.com Fri Dec 7 21:14:04 2001 From: scmacdonald at carlson.com (scot_macdonald) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 21:14:04 -0000 Subject: Muggles / Education basics Message-ID: <9urbes+1057k@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31095 I think it is quite possible that we will see more competent and kind muggles in the next books. Echoing what someone suggested a couple thousand posts ago, I would love to find out the the Muggle Studies prof is an honest to goodness Muggle who landed a sweet job. We know the Hogwarts is not opposed to hiring non-magic types (e.g. Filch). I also think that a Muggle born witch or wizard would be a great candidate for the Muggle Studies teacher position. Knowing muggles from both view points would make for an excellent perspective. I think the fact that Hogwarts offers a Muggle Studies program at all speaks to the fact that Muggles aren't viewed, necessarily, by the entire population as inferior, just different... for expample, many school have ethnic studies and gay studies class.... and human nature causes us to fear that which is different, and to overcome that fear, we need knowledge, which is why we have these classes. ERGO- Hogwarts is striving to eliminate that fear, and dislike of Muggles by educating future generations. I woudl liek to think that the muggle studies students get to go on field trip to see things that to them are completely fascinating... but to us would be completely humdrum (like out to the middle of a field to stare at telephone wires... can't you just picture them being amazed that we can make our voices travel all the way through that itty-bitty cable?) ok... that's enough from me... at least on that topic... Someone else asked about the reading/writing/arithmatic learning that isn't taught at hogwarts, but would obviously be necessary for wizards to learn at some point. Well, we know that Harry, and any muggle borns (or half-bloods raised in muggle society) would have had this information taught to them in elementary/primary/grammar school. Do we know for a fact that no such thing exists in the Wizarding World? I wanted to talk abotu something else while I was in here... but I can't remember what it was... oh well... Scot (from Minneapolis) From cindysphynx at home.com Fri Dec 7 21:17:53 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 21:17:53 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urbm1+a75l@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31096 annahunny2000 slandered: > I'm sorry to say I don't think JKR has given us any truly admirable > grown-ups, with the arguable exception of Dumbledore, in the first 4 > books. > And Sirius is, in my opinion, a rather selfish coward who makes for a > pathetic god-father. I'd say he should suck it up, be a dog 24-7, > and stay by your god-son's side so he doesn't get assassinated. ::Rushes in while pinning S.I.N.I.S.T.E.R. badge onto chest:: Sirius is a selfish coward and pathetic god-father? Oh my goodness, no! Let's take it one at a time. *Selfish*. Sirius could have ran for it after James and Lily were killed and saved his own hide. Instead, he gave his motorbike to Hagrid to assist in Harry's transport. Then, he chased down the spy and tried to kill him. He pulled himself together enough to escape Azkaban once he knew Harry was in danger, not out of concern for himself. Then, when he finally escaped, he could have ran for it again. Instead, he pursued Pettigrew to Hogwarts specifically to protect Harry. *Coward*. Sirius hasn't had a lot of opportunities to demonstrate bravery (other than the ones I just mentioned). But he was injured in the struggle with Lupin-werewolf in an effort to save the trio, not himself. *Pathetic godfather*. Um, I'd say circumstances might have prevented Sirius from performing his duties as a godfather for about a dozen years. From the minute he escaped, he has been working toward only one goal that we know of -- protecting and advising Harry. Anna again: > The Weasleys (actually my personal favorite grown-ups) seem to truly > care about Harry, but don't do squat to help him -- aside from taking > him to a quidditch match. > Actually, the Weasleys do plenty for Harry, considering that they are nothing more than the family of Harry's school chum. They helped him get onto the platform in PS/SS. They rescued him from the wrath of Uncle Vernon in CoS. Arthur tried to warn Harry about Black in PoA, against the wishes of his boss, MoM. And they turned out to support him in the Third Task. Really, what more could they be reasonably expected to do? Bottom line: the kids are, for the most part, the heros in HP, and a story can only have so many heroes. Cindy (who won't even mention all of the support that Hagrid has provided to Harry) From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Fri Dec 7 21:24:59 2001 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 21:24:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione's name In-Reply-To: <9uqu7n+ts4s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urc3b+hg1c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31097 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > Hmmm... Don't want too many connections here. Hermione was affianced > to one fellow, her mum Helen gave her to someone else instead, and > the jilted guy ran off and killed Helen! Orestes killed Helen? Since when? No, Orestes killed Achilles's dumb athletic(:-) son, which would make Orestes, Ron, and the other guy, Viktor Krum! I like it. Eileen PS. I hate Viktor Krum. I mean has he considered that Hermione is only 14? From pbnesbit at msn.com Fri Dec 7 22:00:55 2001 From: pbnesbit at msn.com (harpdreamer) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 22:00:55 -0000 Subject: Attitude Changes (Was: Beatitudes) In-Reply-To: <20011207034310.85616.qmail@web21004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ure6n+tlmj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31098 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., vanessa pryor wrote: > lucky_kari wrote: > > ---Dumbledore is the great peacemaker, bringing even > Sirius and Snape together at the end of GoF > > Yeah but he also gets Snape to be more friendly to > Harry, or at least thats what I got from the end of > GoF. > vanessa Hi all, Actually, I think the change in attitude from Snape toward Harry comes from a change in perception on Snape's part. I have a feeling that at some point, Dumbledore filled Snape in on the happenings in Little Hangleton (in the graveyard). I think Snape is looking at Harry quite differently now, as someone who has '...shouldered a grown wizard's burden and found yourself equal to it...' (GoF, UK ed., p. 606) Likewise, Harry's perception of Snape has changed, after what he witnesses in the pensieve and in the hospital wing. Just my 2 knuts... Peace & Plenty, Parker > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 22:04:03 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:04:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rowling's muggles In-Reply-To: <9uoolj+q605@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207220403.87732.qmail@web20809.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31099 --- lucky_kari wrote: > > They (the Grangers) are > > obviously intelligent (with a daughter like > Hermione, what else > could they > > be) and judging by their willingness to go > shopping in Diagon Alley > they > > have no problem with the magical community. > > Though, after CoS, they never go to Diagon Alley > again. They may have > no problem with the magical community, but the > magical community, > they've learnt, has a problem with them (except for > Arthur Weasley > who takes them out for a drink, but he probably > struck them as > weird.) Maybe but they're willing to let their daughter stay at his house and go off to some wizarding sports event with his family. Personally I think the Weasleys and the Grangers have become quite friendly. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu Fri Dec 7 22:10:31 2001 From: lee_hillman at urmc.rochester.edu (gwendolyngrace) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 22:10:31 -0000 Subject: All things Snape plus Harry (pt 1) In-Reply-To: <9ur0ls+a06a@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ureon+85pc@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31100 Koinonia posted some spiffy comments on my Snape dissertation, and some of her points beg my explanations/clarifications/rebuttals. So: K: > I do believe that Snape could go back to being a spy. That was the > very first thing I thought of at the end of GoF. Dumbledore was > apprehensive and I believe it was because Snape was going somewhere > that put him in danger. > Yes! It's not only *Snape's* blanching that suggests danger, it's Dumbledore's own anxiety in this scene that is telling. K: > I just have a bit of a > problem believing that Snape actually committed murder or tortured > anyone. Regardless of why he left the DE's, surely Dumbledore would > never hire a past murderer to teach young kids. I guess I'm hoping > that Snape was truly unaware of what he was joining. Let me clarify here a bit. First off, I am not saying he understood the full implications of joining V at the time. Clearly, I could not believe that, since I think that it was only *after* he had been party to their activities that he realized he'd made a mistake. However, I do think that he bought the party line in his desire to be part of the cult, and thus probably did participate in an effort to fit in and/or rise in the ranks. And I have no problem with Dumbledore taking him on as a sort of rehab/community service project. Actually, it feels like a very Albus thing to do. I think this is one instance where Sirius does misinform the kids and the audience by not understanding all the facts. Not his fault, mind. :^) K: > I think he didn't stake a claim on Snape's loyalty because he isn't > sure where Snape stands. I guess I belong to the camp that believes > Snape is the one who has left forever. > > "One, who I believe has left me forever..." > It's almost as if Voldemort isn't sure about this DE. > It really depends on the line reading there, I agree. What I mean is, is Voldemort stating that "I believe" as an expression of doubt, or as a considered hypothesis? I tend to read it with slightly more emphasis on the theory, especially when coupled with the confident, "He will be killed, of course." But I still have faith in Snape's ability to occupy that sliver of doubt that I also believe (aha, see?) is there. Besides, if V doubted Snape's loyalty and wanted to know for sure, why wait? Why not seize the opportunity to enlist him in PS? I think if he really feared that Snape wouldn't help him, he would be more certain that Snape is a traitor. IOW, either he thinks Snape might be with him when the time comes, and is waiting for some reason in PS, or he thinks Snape needs to be reminded that he made a mistake and is ready to kill him in GOF, and waited to reveal himself in PS because he wanted to be stronger at the confrontation. K: > I don't have a problem with Snape going back as a spy. However, I > imagine that there are ways that Snape could help Dumbledore that JKR > could come up with. She seems to be pretty good at bringing up new > and exciting ideas. > Perhaps I should take a step back and explain my larger understanding of where the last three books will go. I think we are all pretty sure that we're building up to a major conflict in which most of the magical world will be involved. If anyone thinks there will not be a showdown between the arrayed forces of good and evil, please explain how it would be avoided! Assuming that's right and like most books that take G&E as their theme, there will be a War, the question is *how* will this conflict build to a climax? And then what will be the result? Voldemort is powerful right now, because he's back, but the MInistry doesn't acknowledge this fact officially, and other than the people Dumbledore is informing, largely through word of mouth, and the DE's, *no one else knows he's back.* That means that he can quietly build up his forces, and if he makes no overt moves to show a resurgence, he can amass a lot of power while Dumbledore's forces must move carefully to keep their war engine from appearing to be seditious. I'm not saying that JKR couldn't come up with some surprising move that we couldn't anticipate. But at this point, the development to war is so palpable, I have trouble believing that focusing anywhere else is going to do them any good. It's likely that V will begin attracting supporters again, through his faithful lieutenants. It's likely that he'll use supernatural means to secure the assistance of those dark creatures we heard him talk about. But he'll be doing it all quietly (if he's smart), so it won't exactly be easy to figure out where his army is in terms of rally, supplies, battle plans, and above all, his first public act. I'm not sure what you mean about other spies. Do you mean Dumbledore had other spies in V's camp? Or do you mean he has access to information without someone on the inside? I guess what I'm saying here is that while alliances may be important, knowing V's plan *right now* is just as important--and Snape is the natural man for that job. K: (on alliances) > We don't know much of anything about the vampires. But that doesn't > mean they will not play an important part. Snape could still have > gone back to Voldemort and be a part of the vampire world. Or > perhaps Snape turned his back on the vampire world and now has to go > back and make amends. I still believe he is one :-) Plus, who is to > say the Snape hasn't been negotiating with his fellow creatures for > quite some time? > Again, it's remotely possible, but if you think S is a vampire, and if he's been negotiating with them for a long time, then why would Albus fear for his safety among them? I don't really have time to go further right now. I'll readdress the rest of Koinonia's post later, either this weekend or on Monday! Gwen From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Fri Dec 7 22:11:04 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 22:11:04 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur738+3fur@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urepo+ll43@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31101 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "raolin.rm" wrote: > I'm not sure if that would really be for the best. How, exactly, > does a dog -- even if he is a wizard (without a wand) -- help? He > can't really stay around Hogwarts or Privet Drive any better than he > did. He did rush to Harry as soon as he got out (although revenge > for James and Lily seemed to be a stronger driver than protection of > Harry) and as for sucking it up: he's sucked it up harder than anyone > else in the Potterverse that we know of. Twelve years in Azkaban and > then two years of living off rats as a big black dog? How exactly > does that jive with a selfless coward? Did you mean selfish coward - makes better sense. Anyway, I totally agree with you - it has much been debated on this list about Sirius Black suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which makes a lot of sense in the context of PoA - I won't go into it here as it has been much discussed before and is look-up- able. However, just one dissenting thought - I'm not sure that revenge was his main motive in breaking out of Azkaban. I thought that he was pretty sure that Harry was at Hogwarts, and was worried about Wormtail's proximity to him. So, although he did want to take revenge on Peter Pettigrew, he also very much had Harry's interests and therefore his protection at heart. Catherine From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 22:18:52 2001 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 22:18:52 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9ur0of+m0bu@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urf8c+ma6c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31102 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lenmachine" wrote: > Cindy wrote: > > > Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. > > Although now that he's head of the Department of International Magic > Cooperation, maybe he's more like an American Secretary of State ? :-) > > > Cindy (resisting the strong urge to compare Crouch Sr.'s handling > of > > criminal justice during wartime and John Ashcroft's handling of > same) > > Argh ! Tell me about it !! :-) Like I said, JKR's depictions are > *uncanny*. :-) I guess we could compare the attitude of Fudge (if we think he is just a bumbling politician) with the attitude of others (no real world names mentioned) who refuse to see the danger that really exists and the steps that are necessary to defeat that danger. Legal steps of course. I can see where the real world and the MOM are alike in many ways. There are differences of opinions on what steps should be taken concerning the passing and the enforcing of laws and there will never be complete agreement. I personally loved the Pensieve and the trials. I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more of both. Koinonia From coyote823 at yahoo.com Fri Dec 7 22:21:04 2001 From: coyote823 at yahoo.com (Dawn) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:21:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9ur2ep+pjbv@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011207222104.23858.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31103 I have just finished rereading GF4 and I have begun to find vast simarlarities between JKR and Roald Dahl. In most (I only say most because I have not read them all)of the RD books the children have to fen for themselves and are treated very poorly by the grownups in their life. Dumbledore could of course "take Harry under he's wing" but he chooses to allow Harry to figure it out on his own. The Weasleys are very sweet to Harry sort of like Miss Honey in Matilda but they are powerless to truly help her. Does anyone else see these simaralities? annahunny2000 wrote: --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online at Yahoo! Greetings. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hollydaze at btinternet.com Fri Dec 7 22:29:13 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:29:13 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra and the Swishing Sound References: <9uomc0+m3a8@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <05bf01c17f72$2ead6780$a5e17ad5@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31104 > So what is this swishing sound? With Bryce and the spider, it > appears that the swishing sound is the sound of the spell being > cast. But with Cedric, the swish happens before the spell is even > cast. And when Voldemort casts the spell, there is no swishing noise > reported at all (although this might be because Harry is busy > shouting Expelliarmus). > If the swishing isn't coming from the Avada Kedavra spell itself when > Cedric is killed, what is going on? Is this just another glitch in > the graveyard scene? In the first two cases I think the "rushing" is something to do with the spell (the soul leaving the body or similar - depending on what the spell actually means and so what it does). With Cedric, I think the "swishing" is the sound of the wand moving through the air. The "rushing" sound isn't mentioned as perhaps it would be to *too obvious* if she mentioned it all the time. It still happens (or something along those lines), but someone one will spot it if it is mentioned every time Avada Kedavra is cast and JK doesn't like to make things obvious. With Harry we don't get a swish because that never happens when there is lots of noise and we can safely presume that with Harry running away, all the death eaters chasing him and casting spells that there is a lot of noise. The "rushing" sound never comes because the spell doesn't hit Harry. That's all I can presume anyway. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Fri Dec 7 23:00:40 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:00:40 -0500 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World References: <1007756389.1849.60328.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C114A18.A962DFEA@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31105 I take back what I wrote earlier about the wizard world being a dictatorship. (I'm tempted to go back to my earlier diagnosis of anarchy, and to throw that label at the British system as described by Gabriel, but as an American, I think I should just shut up about the failings of other people's political systems.) On reflection, I know there are laws and a method for passing them. Arthur Weasley is apparently not in violation of laws regarding enchanted Muggle artifacts, for example, as long as he doesn't actually *fly* that car of his. (Of course, according to Molly, he *wrote* that law, including the loophole he's exploiting.) And he's working on some kind of "Muggle Protection Act" as well. So apparently Arthur's position in the Ministry is such that he can author laws and advocate for their passage. We still don't know anything about *how* the laws get passed, though, or what the normal (non-wartime) judicial system looks like. But I really shouldn't try to comment on that, as I'm really not qualified to make comparisons between the finer details of different judicial systems (or government systems, for that matter) even if we did have more evidence of what these things are like in the wizard world. All of which was probably a rather long-winded way of saying I'll shut up now.... Elizabeth From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Fri Dec 7 23:16:04 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:16:04 -0500 Subject: HP and the Eightfold Path References: <1007756389.1849.60328.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C114DB4.E2D4262B@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31106 Emily wrote: > As someone with devout Buddhist parents and who has sat in on a > number of teachings and practices over the last ten years, I would > tend to balk at drawing parallels between the tenets of the Eightfold > Path and the lessons in HP simply because they have different aims. You undoubtedly know far more about Buddhism than I do. And the limited amount that I do know is largely based on Zen (with some odd bits of Theravada thrown in). I am going to guess (and I hope you will excuse me if I am mistaken) that you are most familiar with Chinese Buddhism. There are some differences between different branches that even I, a relative novice, am aware of, but I don't think that's critical to this discussion. However, I would suggest that whether or not one can analyze the books in terms of how they compare to the Eightfold Path -- or any other religious statements -- is not dependent on whether the books actually support or conflict with those statements. The point of the analysis would be to establish or refute that very connection. Which you just did. > Anyway, I think that approaching HP through the Eightfold Path, > especially without an eye towards what the Eightfold Path really > intends to lead you, would be no more than superficial, and wouldn't > really get to the heart of what Buddhism is really about. I agree. I'd be interested in seeing a more extended analysis of this from your point of view, but I'm not going to attempt it. A universalist like myself makes a poor excuse for a Buddhist when there's a real one in the group. Elizabeth (who is currently trying to learn more about Chinese Buddhism, because my daughter is Chinese, and keeps asking me about Buddhist-related stuff she remembers doing in China.) From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 23:21:23 2001 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 23:21:23 -0000 Subject: All things Snape plus Harry (pt 1) In-Reply-To: <9ureon+85pc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uritj+ceu1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31107 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "gwendolyngrace" wrote: > Yes! It's not only *Snape's* blanching that suggests danger, it's > Dumbledore's own anxiety in this scene that is telling. I guess 'The Parting of the Ways' in GoF is my favorite chapter of all the books. I love the part where Snape just says he is ready and goes off to do what needs to be done regardless of the danger. Dumbledore seems very concerned and it's nice to think that someone truly cares about Snape. >And I have no problem with Dumbledore taking him on > as a sort of rehab/community service project. Actually, it feels >like > a very Albus thing to do. Dumbledore is a wonderful man who I just love. I don't have any problem with him giving Snape a second chance *depending* on what Snape did. Murder and torture? Not someone I would want teaching my kids. I'm afraid he would have to do his rehab in Azkaban. I'm still hoping Snape jumped ship at the first sign of murder and never committed such acts. >I think this is one instance where Sirius > does misinform the kids and the audience by not understanding all >the > facts. Not his fault, mind. :^) Poor Sirius. He just can't look at Snape without hate in his eyes. > It really depends on the line reading there, I agree. What I mean >is, > is Voldemort stating that "I believe" as an expression of doubt, or >as > a considered hypothesis? > > I tend to read it with slightly more emphasis on the theory, > especially when coupled with the confident, "He will be killed, of > course." But I still have faith in Snape's ability to occupy that > sliver of doubt that I also believe (aha, see?) is there. I have always felt that Voldemort showed just a bit of doubt as to whether this person had truly left him. Since that person didn't show up at the DE meeting he will now have that person killed. > Besides, if V doubted Snape's loyalty and wanted to know for sure, >why > wait? Why not seize the opportunity to enlist him in PS? Voldemort is weak at this time. I don't believe he wanted to take a chance of ruining his comeback. I doubt if would have been able to defend himself against Snape and Dumbledore. Of course I still believe Dumbledore needed for V to be in another bodily form in order to truly defeat him. Voldemort couldn't be done away with as he was. But that leads to another topic. > I think if he really feared that Snape wouldn't help him, he would >be > more certain that Snape is a traitor. IOW, either he thinks Snape > might be with him when the time comes, and is waiting for some >reason > in PS, or he thinks Snape needs to be reminded that he made a >mistake > and is ready to kill him in GOF, and waited to reveal himself in PS > because he wanted to be stronger at the confrontation. Voldemort has had two opportunites to employ the help of Snape and he never did. He never asked for help from Snape in PS or in GoF. It would surely have been to his advantage in both those instances to have his help. After all V. did accept the help of Wormtail. "I see you all, whole and healthy, with your powers intact---such prompt appearances!---and I ask myself...why did this band of wizards never come to the aid of their master, to whom they swore eternal loyalty? "And I answer myself," whispered Voldemort, "they must have believed me broken, they thought I was gone. They slipped back among my enemies, and they pleaded innocence, and ignorance, and bewitchment..." "And I answer myself, perhaps they believed a still greater power could exist, one that could vanquish even Lord Voldemort...perhaps they now pay allegiance to another... perhaps that champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, Albus Dumbledore." "Surely, one of my faithful Death Eaters would try and find me...one of them would come and perform the magic I could not, to restore me to a body..but I waited in vain..." "Oh, he seemed the very chance I had been dreaming of...for he was a teacher at Dumbledore's school..." I don't think V would have passed up help from Snape at any time if he knew for certain that Snape was still a loyal DE. Plus, Voldemort seemed excited to finally have someone he could rely on at Hogwarts. "Oh, he seemed the very chance I had been dreaming of..."Then why did he never approach Snape? Just think what he could have done with both Crouch Jr. and Snape. I just think there was some doubt in his mind as to Snape's loyalties. Just the fact that Snape was teaching at Hogwarts where Albus Dumbledore is headmaster would make V have doubts and we all know how much V dislikes Albus. I think we are all pretty sure > that we're building up to a major conflict in which most of the > magical world will be involved. If anyone thinks there will not be a > showdown between the arrayed forces of good and evil, please explain > how it would be avoided! > > Assuming that's right and like most books that take G&E as their > theme, there will be a War, the question is *how* will this conflict > build to a climax? And then what will be the result? > I'm not saying that JKR couldn't come up with some surprising move > that we couldn't anticipate. >But at this point, the development to >war > is so palpable, I have trouble believing that focusing anywhere else > is going to do them any good. > > It's likely that V will begin attracting supporters again, through his > faithful lieutenants. It's likely that he'll use supernatural means to > secure the assistance of those dark creatures we heard him talk about. > But he'll be doing it all quietly (if he's smart), so it won't exactly > be easy to figure out where his army is in terms of rally, supplies, > battle plans, and above all, his first public act. Like Voldemort I believe Dumbledore is also getting his supporters together. Actually I believe Dumbledore has surrounded himself for years with those that he knows he will need when it's time to face Voldemort again. > > I'm not sure what you mean about other spies. Do you mean Dumbledore > had other spies in V's camp? Or do you mean he has access to > information without someone on the inside? POA "Worse even than that, m'dear...'Fudge dropped his voice and proceeded in a sort of low rumble. 'Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies." I imagine that there are still some of those spies still around. Who knows, maybe Snape wasn't the only DE spy for Dumbledore. > I guess what I'm saying here is that while alliances may be important, > knowing V's plan *right now* is just as important--and Snape is the > natural man for that job. I do agree that Dumbledore needs to know what is going on and Snape could very well be the man. > > Again, it's remotely possible, but if you think S is a vampire, and if > he's been negotiating with them for a long time, then why would Albus > fear for his safety among them? I guess he would fear them if he had left them or maybe no one knows he is a vampire. Maybe he is going to introduce himself to all his brother and sister vampires for the first time ;-) > I don't really have time to go further right now. Neither do I. I'm being pressured to press the 'send' button at this very moment and I'm afraid it might be days until I make it back here. I really wanted to comment more on Lucius and Harry but that will have to wait. Koinonia From cindysphynx at home.com Fri Dec 7 23:46:19 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 23:46:19 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9urkcc+9lq9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31108 Gabriel Rozenberg wrote: > I think most US people on-list are in danger of assuming too much >that > government works the same in the US as everywhere else. I have been painted into a corner and am running the white flag up the pole. I give! I surrender! Uncle! :-) Actually, I know there are many differences in the legal systems and political systems of Britain and the U.S. I just had no idea what they were. Until Gabriel straightened me out, that is. But as the U.S. framework is the only framework with which I have experience, I thought I'd have a go. As I indicated, I'm in the camp that believes the wizarding world is not a dictatorship. So let's see if any of my U.S.-based theories haven't been entirely gutted. Cindy wrote: > >Also, Fudge tells Snape in PoA that he'll try to arrange for Snape to > >receive Order of Merlin, First Class, if Fudge can manage it. This > >suggests that *someone* has authority over Fudge in these matters - - > >probably the wizarding legislature. I don't think Fudge is > >necessarily supposed to be a dictator. I think he is just sort of > >representative of the most of the government, rolled up into one > >person for convenience and simplicity. > > Gabriel wrote: > All government Ministers have similarly broad powers. If a >government > minister wanted to get someone knighted, he'd send a note over to the Prime > Minister and ask if he could sort it out. It might happen if the PM >felt he > owed him a favour, etc. Doesn't that prove my point that Fudge is not a dictator? He expresses doubt that he can secure the highest honour for Snape, which is something that wouldn't trouble a true dictator at all. Cindy wrote: > >The other reason I don't think the wizarding world is a dictatorship > >is that Crouch Sr. had substantial powers as the Head of Magical Law > >Enforcement. He, not the Minister of Magic, made a number of > >critical decisions (aurors could use unforgivable curses). Since the > >wizarding world was in a war with Voldemort, Crouch Sr.'s power to > >direct the war effort suggests that he, not the Minister of Magic, > >might be the commander in chief. > > Gabrielle wrote: > Or he could've been in Fudge's War Cabinet. Since Churchill at least the PM > in times of war has picked 4 favcoured Cabinet ministers to form an inner > cabinet which can make quick decisions. That would give Crouch quite enough > influence. We don't really have a singe c-in-c like the US (well we do, but > since she's the Queen, and follows the advice of her ministers, whatever > that means, executive power can be dispersed through many or held by one > depending on circumstance.) > Let me first clarify that when I wrote "commander in chief," I was thinking of "commander in chief of the military." In the U.S., that's the president. If Crouch Sr. really had the power to direct the Voldemort war effort independent of the Minister of Magic's wishes, I figured that might indicate a less than all-powerful Minister of Magic. But as you point out, we really don't have a lot of information to go on. In any event, I know I'm on really thin ice here, but I don't see how this point undermines the theory that the wizarding world isn't a dictatorship. After all, if there are cabinet ministers making critical decisions without approval from the dictator, then I guess it is an awfully loose dictatorship. Perhaps this is akin to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the U.S., then? Gabrielle wrote: > Indeed: in fact trials are much fairer in Britain, since the press is > stopped from printing anything which could prejudice the jury; the judge > can't overrule the jury's verdict as I think sometimes happens in some US > courts; etc. > I need to gather up the other lawyers on the board for a frontal assault to beat back the assertion that trials are much fairer in Britain. :-) For instance, the judge's ability to overrule the jury in the U.S. exists as a safeguard for the defendant. IIRC, the judge can overrule a guilty verdict and free the defendant, but can never pronounce the defendant guilty if the jury has found otherwise. Many people also believe that having public trials and allowing media access is also of benefit to the defendant in many cases, as it prevents "railroading." I could bore everyone senseless with a list of criminal law safeguards in the U.S. that may (or may not) be present in Britain. But I can't get on board with the idea that the British way is "much fairer." Not yet, anyway. :-) I think that we can surely agree, however, that trials in the U.S. and in Britain are *much* more fair than wizarding trials. Cindy wrote: > >Hmmm. Well, if the Ministry of Magic is equivalent to the U.S. > >government, then it might very well have separation of powers after > >all. Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. > Gabrielle wrote: > But he's a minister! Seems unlikely. I don't think I expressed myself well there. I meant that when Crouch Sr. was the Head of Magical Law Enforcement during the Voldemort years, he was akin to our friend John Ashcroft, the U.S. Attorney General and head of the Department of Justice. I have no idea how that correlates to the British legal system, but I'd love to know. Cindy From clio at unicum.de Fri Dec 7 23:59:03 2001 From: clio at unicum.de (clio44a) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 23:59:03 -0000 Subject: All things Snape plus Harry (pt 1) In-Reply-To: <9uritj+ceu1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9url47+2e2u@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31109 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "koinonia02" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "gwendolyngrace" wrote: > > > Yes! It's not only *Snape's* blanching that suggests danger, it's > > Dumbledore's own anxiety in this scene that is telling. > > I guess 'The Parting of the Ways' in GoF is my favorite chapter of > all the books. I love the part where Snape just says he is ready and > goes off to do what needs to be done regardless of the danger. > Dumbledore seems very concerned and it's nice to think that someone > truly cares about Snape. If I recall it correctly Dumbledore watched Snape leave with a trace of apprehension in his face. Well, maybe he doubts Snapes ulterior motives and is worried which side Snape will be with, now that the old conflicts are reborn. Or he doubts Snape's ability to withstand the lures of Lord Voldemort. Clio From butagirl at aol.com Sat Dec 8 00:06:08 2001 From: butagirl at aol.com (butagirl at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:06:08 EST Subject: Javert, Percy, Snape and Neville Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31110 Molly Denton wrote: <> and wrote: << > > I know of the story, but Javert is an obsessive man who wants all > of the power.>> I must disagree, both in the analysis of Javert and the comparison to Percy. Deep down, Javert is not an evil man, but is rather saddled by an overwhelming sense of duty. Unfortunately this causes massive conflicts because of the demands on him by a) being entrusted with enforcing the law and b) the debts of gratitude to the criminal Valjean that he feels in his heart he must uphold. He is a character to be pitied, not loathed, and his self-destruction is one of the most tragic elements of the saga, IMO. A similar character, although in a much more light-hearted vein, is Dick Deadeye in HMS Pinafore - ugly in appearance and ill-tempered in character, he is universally disliked, yet all of his unsavoury actions can be attributed to "doing the right thing". Before you brought the character of Javert up, I had always equated Javert with Snape. This man appears to be torn in different directions by the the events of his past - his dislike of James versus the fact that he saved his life. Although Snape obviously does dislike Harry, there is no evidence beyond simple petty behaviour that he treats him cruelly. Snape does what he believes is the right thing - for example chanting the counter-curse to aid Harry in his Quidditch match - though it's obvious he'd rather be protecting someone else. If he is indeed beholden to Harry because he has to trust the boy not to spread the truth about his DE past, then this will hardly improve matters. On the subject of Neville, I think he is a prime candidate to join the Dark Side - albeit temporarily, and not of his own volition. My theory is: Someone in league with LV befriends him and, being quite a lonely boy and not the sharpest tool in the box, Neville is taken in by these advances of friendship (I don't feel that he would be bewitched into doing this, because it's already been done with Ginny in PoA). He would eventually see the light and return to the fold, but not before some damage has been done. Sharon Brindle From smurfs143143 at aol.com Sat Dec 8 01:41:36 2001 From: smurfs143143 at aol.com (smurfs143143 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:41:36 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Javert, Percy, Snape and Neville Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31111 In a message dated 12/7/01 7:07:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, butagirl at aol.com writes: << I must disagree, both in the analysis of Javert and the comparison to Percy. Deep down, Javert is not an evil man, but is rather saddled by an overwhelming sense of duty. Unfortunately this causes massive conflicts because of the demands on him by a) being entrusted with enforcing the law and b) the debts of gratitude to the criminal Valjean that he feels in his heart he must uphold. He is a character to be pitied, not loathed, and his self-destruction is one of the most tragic elements of the saga, IMO. A similar character, although in a much more light-hearted vein, is Dick Deadeye in HMS Pinafore - ugly in appearance and ill-tempered in character, he is universally disliked, yet all of his unsavoury actions can be attributed to "doing the right thing". >> well - I do not agree that Javert's actions very a result of an overwhelming sense of duty - I do agree he is to be pitied. I. myself, feel very sorry for him and i do believe that he is a good man. In my opinion, Javert has just been mislead by rules and society at the time - he was just doing his job the way he was taught - but when he finally finds out the truth of the situation - he believes it is too late and turns to death. In this way, I do believe that Percy is like Javert - but an even more relevant character - and the first one that popped into my head - was Fudge. You could say both were blinded by power - but Fudge is more - as he sees no possibility for anybody's redemption (Fudge to Sirius)(like Javert to Valjean) and does not want to trust information from "different" class of people (Harry because he was a parselmouth) (like Javert to Fantine). Love, Elizabeth From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 8 01:55:07 2001 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 01:55:07 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Home Security In-Reply-To: <9uo2i8+agmp@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urrtr+4oug@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31112 > From that, I assume that your average wizarding family puts a spell > on their home when they leave to "lock" the home, but someone clever > like Sirius can break the spell. The problem, though, is that Sirius > almost certainly doesn't have a wand. So how does he break into this > wizarding home? > The answer, perhaps, is that he simply apparates from outside the > wizarding home to the inside and back again. If that is so, then how > do wizards protect themselves against burglary-by-apparition? I don't think apparating is the answer for two reasons. One, I think you probably need your wand to do that, and two, you're right, that would make any house completely unsecure. I think wizards do use charms or spells or whatever. I wonder if there are degrees of security, just like we have simple locks, deadbolts, the sliding chain thing, or some combination. Perhaps some wizard families feel pretty safe in their communities, and only use the bare minimum security charm. And perhaps these charms would be relatively easy for a skilled wizard to overcome, even without a wand. If that's the case, maybe Sirius acted like a skilled burglar and hunted around until he found a wizard house that only used a simple security charm. I was thinking along the same lines with regard to Floo Powder. You would think that there would also be some way to keep undesirables from showing up in your fireplace. If not, again, anyone could show up. There has to be a way to connect your fireplace to the Floo Network, but also to prevent the whole wizard world from having access. Marianne From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Dec 8 02:02:58 2001 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 02:02:58 -0000 Subject: JKR in Bon Appetit (was Butterbeer) In-Reply-To: <9uoeel+qprc@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9ursci+d6sh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31113 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "moorequests" wrote: > : > > Do we know or are there any guesses as to the alcoholic content of > Butterbeer? > > -Molly Denton In the Annual Special issue of Bon Appetit,(a US food magazine) JKR was asked "What is butterbeer and what does it taste like?" Her answer: "I made it up. I imagine it to taste a little bit like less sickly butterscotch." She made no mention of its alcoholic content. Marianne From sonjahric at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 02:03:41 2001 From: sonjahric at yahoo.com (sonjahric) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 02:03:41 -0000 Subject: Muggle vs. wizard world, are wizards boring?/entertainment/exercise Message-ID: <9ursdt+epnm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31114 I have always found the lack of entertainment for wizards odd. The only game the students play is wizard chess. I would think they would play other games (either original wizard games or adaptations of muggle games. They have no T.V. or radio at school (or anything comparable - we know they have radio at home, why not a school?) Is this nose-to-the-grindstone life typical of European boarding schools? It is no wonder they get into mischief! I have noticed that wizards shun muggle activities even when they don't have a good alternative. Ie. - wizard kids don't ride bikes. Well, they ride brooms, but they can't do that everywhere. Wouldn't a bike be fun too! The lake is frozen solid in winter, but they don't seem to ice skate. Why not? If it is just b/c it is a muggle activity, why don't they have something comparible. They do have snowball fights and that is something muggles do. (Just a few of the examples that have been bugging me.) Someone very recently mentioned that wizards from muggle families probably miss things from the muggle world. I definitely would. No: ice skating, basketball, bike riding, skate boarding, t.v., radio, computers, board games, etc. Heck, no exercise! (I have often wondered why there is no class that requires physical exercise - even the wizard sports don't require much physical effort) Lack of exercise can sure make you depressed, not to mention unhealthy. Maybe there are magical ways to keep you fit? Any ideas? And while I am rambling and ranting, why don't the students play pick up games of quidditch? Why isn't there a larger variety of wizard sports? Sorry for my rambling and confusion. I know what I'm thinking but just can't get it out! sonja (thankful that this website is partially satisfying her nearly insatiable thirst/hunger for more Harry Potter) ps. Am i the only one who wishes JKR would release book 5 in monthly installments. I am already dreading fininshing the 5th book and having to indure a long wait for the 6th. It just doesn't seem fair. My obsession will only be cured for about 2 days (while I am reading 5) then I will be nearly miserable again! From tabouli at unite.com.au Sat Dec 8 02:23:29 2001 From: tabouli at unite.com.au (Tabouli) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:23:29 +1100 Subject: LOLLIPOPS responds to the attack on Snape/Lily! Message-ID: <004401c17f8f$691f62c0$8834c2cb@price> No: HPFGUIDX 31115 On Snape's past with a capital P... Elizabeth (who seems, gasp! to have disembarked from the good ship LOLLIPOPS!): > Then the kid shows up at Hogwarts and (from Snape's point of view) has the same stubborn, arrogant conviction as his father that he can choose his own friends, thanks, and that rules don't apply to him. > >To my mind, this is a much more powerful motivation for Snape's constant snarling at Harry than anything involving Lily (and I had formerly been in the torch-for-Lily camp).< What, what? Are my crew abandoning ship? Allllll right. Can't have this. Now, I'm at a disadvantage here, having lent out my copy of PS/SS, but I'd like to remind everyone that Snape was ALREADY glowering and persecuting Harry when he had NOT see any evidence of Harry's "stubborn, arrogant etc." at ALL. In the book, Harry, IIRC, snubbed Draco On The Train. He walked into the Hall, was sorted into Gryffindor, and sat down. What an arrogant prat, just like James! No wonder Snape was glaring viciously at him. Clearly he was going to be troublesome to protect (says Tabouli sarcastically). Was he hoping Harry would be humble enough to be sorted into Slytherin, where he could keep a closer eye on him?? Chh. Then Harry turned up at the first Potions class. How dare he? Obviously asking to have his teacher first sneer at his "celebrity status" and then attempt to humiliate him by asking him three questions he knew perfectly well that no first year raised by Muggles would be able to answer (Hermione aside). Snape knows this perfectly well. He is launching into an unprovoked persecution campaign before Harry's even said a word in his presence. Then we have the evasive Hagrid, who won't meet Harry's eye when Harry suggests that Snape hates him. Obviously there is a very good reason why Snape would hate Harry. OK, by that stage Harry's already earned special privileges by getting a broom and becoming Seeker, so you could argue that Snape has some evidence of Harry's privileges, arrogance, etc., but um, surely Hagrid's reaction suggests that the reason is rather more significant than that and stems from a past well predating Harry's arrival at Hogwarts which even he knows is not fit for an 11yo boy, or which Dumbledore has made very clear is private property. Hagrid's not known for his ability to keep secrets: if it was just that Snape resented Harry because James was a Quidditch star and Harry now is too, I don't see why he couldn't say "Snape was jealous of yeh dad, Harry, and I reckon he's likely a mite jealous of you as well, now yer playin' Quidditch an' all" and reassure him that though Snape might resent him a bit, he'd never kill him over it. The Quidditch factor is another clue, I think. *Everyone* is carrying on about Snape being jealous of James, yet the reason they come up with always seems to be that James was good at Quidditch. Dumbledore says that Snape was jealous of James' Quidditch prowess, Snape hisses that James' arrogance was Quidditch based... how important can Quidditch actually *be* to someone like Snape? Rivalry between Slytherin and Gryffindor fuelling enmity I can credit, but undying, generation-crossing jealousy based on James' performance at sport?? Nahhh. Sounds like everyone's telling Harry only the half the truth to me. On the other hand, throw in James the Quidditch star who is Admired By The Girl Snape Wants, and it makes resounding sense. How can she go for that strutting jock over him?? How can Lily, so pretty, so kind and clever, fall for that prat just because he's good at chucking Quaffles??? My, how the resentment would grow. And then James gets to play hero by saving Snape's life... hoooo. And then *marries* Lily and then gets her killed and has a son who looks just like him with Lily's eyes... ... phew, poor Snape. Under the circumstances, just the sight of Harry would offend him, let alone Harry repeating history by getting onto the Quidditch team. Nope, I won't be moved on this one, not until OoP provides some conclusive evidence to the contrary. (Amanda, Amanda, back me up here!) As for Snape's Past, you know what they say about bullies. They tend to repeat history. Maybe Snape was bullied cruelly as a child, and probably by an older man, his father or stepfather, older brother, maybe even a nasty persecuting teacher. (we could even theorise that he had a brother, killed by Voldemort, who famous, handsome and everyone's favorite Snape brother...). At the time he felt powerless to object, resentful, bitter... then as he got older and bigger and a position of power, he began bullying his students as he was bullied... Koinonia (quoting me): >>As for Snape leaving Voldemort before James and Lily died and the >reasons therefor (?), those of you who got to the end of my >Unauthorised Biography of Severus Snape.... >Sorry, I don't read any fanfic :-) Accckkk, it *wasn't* fanfic!! I'm beginning to see that titling my speculations about Snape in this way was a serious tactical error... all the anti-fanfickers refused to read it. I know my posts are long and verbose, and some may not have to patience to read them, but not reading what was effectively a summary of everything about Snape, past and present, I could find (hours of research, I put in!) and how it could be explained, which I put into a vague narrative structure to give it some coherence and continuity, on the grounds of it being "fanfic"... gssssss. In a final billow of the LOLLIPOPS sails, look, I have some sympathy for those who think any form of tragic romance sub-plot is too eww to be treww, blaggh, spare us the smoochy stuff. Once upon a time, I would express similar sentiments and would sigh gustily whenever the obligatory Love Interest violined her/his way onto centre stage. But that doesn't mean that (a) it's too yikky to be a possibility, and (b) JKR couldn't do a tasteful job of it. I'm sure she can. After all, she handled the Yule Ball with great style. (Wangoballwime?) Tabouli. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 02:44:50 2001 From: jferer at yahoo.com (jferer) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 02:44:50 -0000 Subject: Muggle vs. wizard world, are wizards boring?/entertainment/exercise In-Reply-To: <9ursdt+epnm@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9urur2+93u4@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31117 Sonja:"I have noticed that wizards shun muggle activities even when they don't have a good alternative. Ie. - wizard kids don't ride bikes. Well, they ride brooms, but they can't do that everywhere. Wouldn't a bike be fun too! The lake is frozen solid in winter, but they don't seem to ice skate. Why not? If it is just b/c it is a muggle activity, why don't they have something comparible. They do have snowball fights and that is something muggles do. (Just a few of the examples that have been bugging me.)" We don't *see* wizard kids ride Muggle bikes, or skating, but it's inevitable it would get started. Imagine: a Muggle-born at Hogwarts brings his/her skates back to school after Christmas and skates on the pond. All the other students see it, think it looks cool, and decide to try it themselves. Somebody is bound to bring their Scrabble board to school with them. And so on and on. As long as the Muggle world and wizard world intersect at Hogwarts, things like this will happen. I'll bet this is the kind of thing that drives Lucius nuts. Sonja:"Someone very recently mentioned that wizards from muggle families probably miss things from the muggle world. I definitely would. No: ice skating, basketball, bike riding, skate boarding, t.v., radio, computers, board games, etc. Heck, no exercise!" Exactly. And I think these things, except radio and TV [too much magic in the air] do come to Hogwarts. And people always want to see what they can do with their bodies in excercise. Our view of the wizard world through the books is like viewing the world by peering through a soda straw. They're Harry's story of a whole year at school, and I believe about 98% of it gets left out. It's unavoidable. Sonja:"Am i the only one who wishes JKR would release book 5 in monthly installments?" The publishing world would go beserk. What an idea! Maybe a chapter every Sunday in the newspaper! It'd be the biggest shot in the arm to the magazine world since Beeton's Christmas Annual. From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sat Dec 8 02:56:26 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 21:56:26 -0500 Subject: Muggle studies, alternate studies, grownups, Javert References: <1007776986.1988.28636.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C11815A.B71EF57F@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31118 Scot (from Minneapolis) wrote: > I would love to find out the the Muggle Studies > prof is an honest to goodness Muggle who landed a sweet job. Wouldn't we all. Aren't we all wishing we could have that job? Given that we're too old to get the invitation letter... We're also waiting to find out who the "late bloomer" is that JKR mentioned in the interview. At least, I am. :) Actually, I'd also like to see a "Comparative Magic" class. Something that covers how magical traditions vary in different parts of the world. JKR touches on this briefly in QTA and FB, but doesn't say much about it in the books. If I had time to write fanfic, I'd write about a visiting professor from Asia (for talking purposes) who would do a two-week rotation in each class, to give the kids an alternate perspective. I think that could really help the next generation find some creative solutions for fighting Voldemort, who seems to have stayed largely within the confines of Europe. It would be fun to write, too. Chinese medicine in potions class, ofuda in DADA, shinto fire-reading in divinations, flying carpets vs. brooms (they'd need a special import license for that one)... I can't think of a good equivalent for Charms, though. Anyway, as all this has nothing to do with canon, I suppose it's OT. Or is it? Can we discuss what new mythological traditions JKR might pull in, and how? annahunny2000 at yahoo.com started a thread called "Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot". Many others have disagreed with her original remarks, so I won't go further down that road (for once). Dawn made some good comparisons to Roald Dahl's treatment of grownups, and generally this is pretty common in children's lit, as others have pointed out. But as we've also noted, the books are shifting from kid's books to more adult books as Harry ages, and I've noticed an interesting transition over the course of the four books so far, that pretty much tracks how a kid of Harry's age views grownups in our world: SS/PS: Grownups are a pain. They are stupid, nasty, or at best amusing. Usually they try to stop you from doing what you want to do. They never tell you anything. But if things go really wrong, the few "good" ones can usually fix it. CoS: Grownups can be a little bit interesting, but generally they still seem to just want to make rules, and they don't help much in a pinch. Some of them are liars. A few are really useful, but they still don't answer questions the way they should. PoA: Some grownups are pretty cool-- especially the ones who don't treat you like a kid. Grownups may have problems you don't know about. Some of them are worse than you've suspected-- in ways that make "bad" grownups you've known before look less significant. Some grownups might know someting worth learning. At least now sometimes they tell you stuff you need to know. Some of them, anyway. GoF: Grownups have *lots* of problems you've never realized you don't know about. They have pasts, often going back to events that happened before you were even born. They don't have things under control the way you thought they did. They can't protect you from bad things nearly to the extent you'd believed. On the plus side, they can be better listeners than you would have thought, and if anything, you might wish they'd skip telling you some things. Some of them are even more powerful than you thought they could be when you were eleven. But they may not be around to help forever. I predict that in future books, as Harry becomes close to "grown up" himself, he'll come closer and closer to a viewpoint like this: - Grownups are just people (like you). Some are good, some are bad. Some may have reasons for acting that you don't know about or understand. Some are more powerful than you, some less so. Some are wiser than you, some less so. All of them are mortal. And so are you. Another Elizabeth (aka smurfs143143 at aol.com) posted a nice comparison of Fudge and Javert. Works for me. Except that I don't see Fudge as quite as driven as Javert. Elizabeth.... (Now I need some distinguishing feature... Hm... I'll have to think about this a bit. I don't know much about the other Elizabeth, so I don't know what would distinguish us from each other. Maybe just Elizabeth-the-long-winded... ;) From blpurdom at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 03:07:09 2001 From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (blpurdom) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 03:07:09 -0000 Subject: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <20011207222104.23858.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9us04t+c6t5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31119 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Dawn wrote: > > I have just finished rereading GF4 and I have begun to find vast > simarlarities between JKR and Roald Dahl. In most (I only say > most because I have not read them all)of the RD books the children > have to fen for themselves and are treated very poorly by the > grownups in their life. Dumbledore could of course "take Harry > under he's wing" but he chooses to allow Harry to figure it out on > his own. The Weasleys are very sweet to Harry sort of like Miss > Honey in Matilda but they are powerless to truly help her. Does > anyone else see these simaralities? Actually, it's not just Roald Dahl's books. It's a common theme in children's literature in general. To name just two other examples, you have Jane Langton's books about the Hall children (Diamond in the Window, Swing in the Summerhouse, etc.) which also share a number of other similarities with the HP books, and Susan Cooper's The Dark is Rising sequence (Merriman Lyon being the exception as far as ineffectual adults go). That said, it is interesting that the most competent people in the HP world seem (on the surface) to be the ones up to no good. 1. Quirrell - successfully reaches the mirror where the stone is being kept and manages to otherwise seem innocent and harmless until then. 2. Lockhart - wildly successful at claiming other people accomplishments for his own. He comes very close to wiping out Ron's and Harry's memories and leaving them in the Chamber of Secrets (thwarted only by Ron's broken wand). 3. Pettigrew - managed to lie low with the Weasleys for twelve years and then when discovered, he escaped and became instrumental in Voldemort's rebirth. 4. Moody/Crouch - overcame the Imperius Curse his father had on him, killed his father, overpowered a very paranoid Auror and kept him in a trunk for ten months, fooling even Dumbledore with his impersonation of a very distinctive person, and on top of all that, managed to get Harry into the Tournament and through it all unscathed. There are good witches and wizards who are competant as well, but they generally come with liabilities: 1. Sirius - managed to infiltrate Gryffindor Tower, getting past swarms of dementors and the Fat Lady (liability: on the run, no wand). 2. Lupin - excellent DADA teacher (liability: werewolf). 3, 4, 5, 6. Arthur, Molly, Bill and Charlie Weasley - all competent people, their only liability (if you want to think of it that way) that they won't stoop to some of the same things as the bad folks. Minerva McGonagall observed once that Dumbledore could beat Voldemort if he chose to; Dumbledore seemed reluctant to call on the kind of power that would be necessary to accomplish this. So even though the evil people seem better at magic than the good people, the good people don't want to compromise their principles to achieve an end. This is something Harry is already learning (sometimes the hard way, such as when he spares Pettigrew) but would we keep reading books about a boy who could sentence someone to death when he's thirteen, even the person responsible for his parents' deaths? I think the adults Harry has for role models are teaching him what he needs to know both magically and morally, and the ones he's fighting are likewise showing him what sort of person he should try NOT to be. Hardly a sorry lot, IMHO. --Barb Get Psyched Out! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Psych http://schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Barb From blpurdom at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 03:22:11 2001 From: blpurdom at yahoo.com (blpurdom) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 03:22:11 -0000 Subject: Javert, Percy, Snape and Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9us113+pd66@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31120 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., butagirl at a... wrote: > Before you brought the character of Javert up, I had always > equated Javert with Snape. This man appears to be torn in > different directions by the the events of his past - his dislike > of James versus the fact that he saved his life. One could equate Snape with Javert and Sirius with Jean Valjean if Snape had actually spent every waking moment since Sirius had escaped from prison trying to track him down, or if he had spent the last twelve years keeping track of Remus Lupin and trying to get him locked up where he couldn't hurt anyone during the full moon. While Snape gets into quite a frenzy at the thought of nailing Sirius, he THINKS he knows what Sirius did: in addition to nearly getting Snape killed while they were students, as far as Snape knows, Sirius was largely responsible for the murder of the man who saved his life and has been hunting down that man's son in order to kill him (Snape is wrong about all this, but then so is everyone else in the wizarding world). This is hardly the same as Javert hounding a man for years who stole a loaf of bread. And at the end of GoF, Snape is willing to put aside all of his bad history with Sirius to fight on the same side. If anyone had a sort of Javert nature, it was Barty Crouch, but inasmuch as he is dead, I don't think we'll be hearing him singing any selections from Les Miz anytime soon... --Barb From frantyck at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 03:29:01 2001 From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 03:29:01 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra and the Swishing Sound In-Reply-To: <9uomc0+m3a8@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9us1dt+jmss@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31121 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Cindy wrote: > In GoF, we see Avada Kedavra used four times. [snip 1] > 2. When Moody kills the spider, "there was a flash of blinding green light and a rushing sound, as though a vast, invisible something was soaring through the air . . . " [snip the other 2 cases] This really grabbed me on the latest reading of GoF. Often with magical spells and all that, I get the feeling that in addition to wand core material and innate magical ability, something 'outside' the witch or wizard is being harnessed to help perform a difficult spell. In this sense, this swishing could, as Hollydaze perceptively noted, be a soul or some such thing leaving the body; it might have a really very clever physical explanation like air being ionised momentarily by some powerful energy as happens during a lightning flash (pause to pat myself on back: pat, pat), if that's accurate and not too extreme; it might be something being called upon; it might, although this is pretty unlikely, be something like an individual form like a daimon which represents the soul or whatever Rowling believes in, leaving the body. Before you howl with mirth, consider that in an interview (my advisor would tsk-tsk briskly over the missing citation here), Rowling noted that an Animagus (fem. Animaga?) cannot *choose* the animal whose form he will take. Against which, I suppose, is the fact that of MWPP, Padfoot and Prongs became large animals so that they might restrain Moony in his extremities... was that choice? (Now feel free to howl with mirth.) Apropos of which, why isn't Rita Skeeter a mosquito or a spider? She seems closer to both than to the much-maligned fly! Whatever the 'truth' may be, Rowling's image of the Killing Curse is appropriately magnificent and dreadful, as it ought to be. The wizard who performs the curse is teetering at some boundary, and it is more than human law and social norms whose limits he tests. It sounds as if, in dabbling with Dark magic, wizards and witches are offering up something in exchange. Think of Voldemort's efforts to achieve immortality: "the steps I had taken" or some such suggestive phrasing. Bargain with the Devil, Faust and all that highly familiar and resonant material comes to mind. And must therefore have come to Rowling's mind as well. From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 8 03:28:49 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 03:28:49 -0000 Subject: Muggle vs. wizard world, are wizards boring?/entertainment/exercise In-Reply-To: <9ursdt+epnm@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9us1dh+942s@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31122 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "sonjahric" wrote: > I have always found the lack of entertainment for wizards odd. The > only game the students play is wizard chess. I don't think wizarding life is as dreary as all that. I recall that they play exploding snap, and they play gobstones. Also, I think wizards make their own fun. This can include making tables soar around and do battle in the air (as in GoF). It can also include (for dark wizards) making muggles fly around in the air. They also seem to seize every opportunity to party hard, as we see after each of Harry's victories in Quiddich or the tasks. As for the lack of exercise, I envy them. Really, how much fun is exercise? It's work, I tell you. As far as communication, wizards have a couple of devices you didn't mention. First, they can summon wizards through the fire and converse with the wizard's head (Diggory and Sirius) or with the whole wizard (Lupin). That is far superior to the telephone. Also, Dumbledore summons Hagrid with that wispy dove thing in GoF, which works as well as a pager. Finally, wizards do play pick-up Quiddich. I think the Weasleys do this with Harry in GoF. On balance, it sounds like wizarding society is more relaxed and quiet, without the constant barrage of noise and stimulation we muggles have to endure. Personally, I would enjoy a little peace and quiet. Cindy From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 03:34:59 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 19:34:59 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Potterworld grown-ups are a sorry lot In-Reply-To: <9us04t+c6t5@eGroups.com> References: <20011207222104.23858.qmail@web12805.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20011207192704.00bad860@pop.mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31123 At 03:07 AM 12/8/01 +0000, blpurdom wrote: >Actually, it's not just Roald Dahl's books. It's a common theme in >children's literature in general. To name just two other examples, >you have Jane Langton's books about the Hall children (Diamond in >the Window, Swing in the Summerhouse, etc.) which also share a >number of other similarities with the HP books, and Susan Cooper's >The Dark is Rising sequence (Merriman Lyon being the exception as >far as ineffectual adults go). Also the Oz books -- In the first few at least, Glinda is about the only competant, non-villianous adult. (Assuming the "grotesques" like the Scarecrow and Tin Man don't count, and even they seem to waste a lot of time talking about how much better they are than the "meat people".) Otherwise the "kids" (e.g. little Dorothy and "teen queen" Ozma) are the ones who pretty much keep Oz in apple-pie order. -- Dave From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 04:11:13 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 04:11:13 -0000 Subject: Muggle studies, alternate studies, grownups, Javert In-Reply-To: <3C11815A.B71EF57F@sun.com> Message-ID: <9us3t1+t547@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31124 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Elizabeth Dalton wrote: > Scot (from Minneapolis) wrote: > > > I would love to find out the the Muggle Studies > > prof is an honest to goodness Muggle who landed a sweet job. > > Wouldn't we all. Aren't we all wishing we could have that job? Given that we're > too old to get the invitation letter... We're also waiting to find out who the > "late bloomer" is that JKR mentioned in the interview. At least, I am. :) > > Actually, I'd also like to see a "Comparative Magic" class. Something that > covers how magical traditions vary in different parts of the world. JKR touches > on this briefly in QTA and FB, but doesn't say much about it in the books. If I > had time to write fanfic, I'd write about a visiting professor from Asia (for > talking purposes) who would do a two-week rotation in each class, to give the > kids an alternate perspective. I think that could really help the next > generation find some creative solutions for fighting Voldemort, who seems to > have stayed largely within the confines of Europe. It would be fun to write, > too. Chinese medicine in potions class, ofuda in DADA, shinto fire- reading in > divinations, flying carpets vs. brooms (they'd need a special import license for > that one)... I can't think of a good equivalent for Charms, though. Anyway, as > all this has nothing to do with canon, I suppose it's OT. Or is it? Can we > discuss what new mythological traditions JKR might pull in, and how? > > Heh... I'm in development on a schnoogle exploring a very similar approach: an expatriate, fugitive Turkish witch who was raised within the vicious struggles of the tribal Djinn Nation in Turkey. She is in hiding for several years and becomes a well-known poet and social rights writer. Hermione discovers her writings, and eventually she ends up at Hogwarts teaching History of Magic, Comparative Magical Systems and Ethics, and Basic Summoning. And then.... ;> -- Heather (uma) From kokobreen at juno.com Sat Dec 8 07:04:32 2001 From: kokobreen at juno.com (christine breen) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:04:32 -0600 Subject: what's the deal with yellow teeth? Message-ID: <20011208.010630.-16666589.5.kokobreen@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31125 Why did Rowling go out of her way to mention that both Snape and Karkaroff have yellow teeth? Do yellow teeth seem more menacing? I know coffe and smoking can stain teeth, so I'm going to assume something about being a death eater has stained their teeth yellow. Drinking potions? Do polyjuice potions stain teeth? Are we to assume that since yellow teeth was mentioned with Snape and Karkaroff, and they were both DEs, that anyone with yellow teeth is/was a DE? Maybe it's a time delayed curst--when someone leaves Voldemort and ceases to be a DE their teeth turn yellow? Who knows. Christine From liquidfire at mindgate.net Sat Dec 8 07:38:40 2001 From: liquidfire at mindgate.net (Liquidfire) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 15:38:40 +0800 Subject: 'admirable' grownups, lack of muggle things in Hogwarts Message-ID: <3.0.6.32.20011208153840.007a95e0@mindgate.net> No: HPFGUIDX 31126 annahunny wrote: >I'm sorry to say I don't think JKR has given us any truly admirable grown-ups, with the arguable exception of Dumbledore, in the first 4 books. The cream of the grown-ups are ineffectual at best. By now it seems obvious that Harry is IT in terms of fighting the evil that could completely consume the wizarding world. Why the heck aren't these folks turning cartwheels to support Harry? Makes for good reading, sure, but doesn't say much for the over-18 set in Potterworld. - I'm going on a limb here. Regardless of how we feel about the whole series, this is still a work of fiction, and we still need to see what's going to happen in the next three books. Who knows, the HP grownups' behavior may well be explained. And excuse me, Sirius is NOT selfish, the Weasleys would do more if they could, and Snape's role has yet to be fully explained, so I really don't buy into that whole the-adults-are-all-stupid-gits argument. Sonja wrote: >I have always found the lack of entertainment for wizards odd. The only game the students play is wizard chess. I would think they would play other games (either original wizard games or adaptations of muggle games. They have no T.V. or radio at school (or anything comparable - we know they have radio at home, why not a school?) Is this nose-to-the-grindstone life typical of European boarding schools? It is no wonder they get into mischief! >I have noticed that wizards shun muggle activities even when they don't have a good alternative. Ie. - wizard kids don't ride bikes. Well, they ride brooms, but they can't do that everywhere. Wouldn't a bike be fun too! The lake is frozen solid in winter, but they don't seem to ice skate. Why not? I'd like to believe that Hogwarts students have other forms of R&R that just hasn't been stated canonically, or at the very least, they can 'make' their own fun. It wouldn't be so hard-pressed to believe that a couple of muggle-borns would have a pair of ice-skates, a sled even, to play with in winter, for example. And if you were skilled enough, I'd bet there were things you could do with a wand to while away the time... (evil grin) It would be safe to assume, however, that they don't have muggle TV, radio, or other electronic stuff in Hogwarts, for the magic in the air would just mess it all up. Liquidfire From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Sat Dec 8 09:45:49 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 09:45:49 -0000 Subject: Fiction and exercise in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <9us1dh+942s@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9usngd+50mk@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31127 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "sonjahric" wrote: > > > I have always found the lack of entertainment for wizards odd. I don't agree with the bulk of this message, because one of the things I like about the books is that all the children aren't obsessed with their Gameboys and TVs. etc. An omission which does concern me though, is lack of fictional reading material. AFAIR, the only reference to fiction in the Wizarding World is the "Mad Muggle" comic books which Ron has in his bedroom. Does it exist? It must do, surely. I would have thought that Hermione in particular would be interested in reading novels (particularly historical ones) by members of the Wizarding World. The other point about exercise - we have discussed on this list before, in relation to the heaviness of the traditionally British Hogwarts food, that it is a wonder that all the children aren't grossly overweight. It was surmised by a few people that performing magic, and the concentration it requires probably takes a great deal of physical as well as mental energy, thereby making the need for exercise of a more traditional kind redundant. We don't, however, know that exercise isn't taken. For instance, it is mentioned that their are reserve players in Quidditch, so surely there are other practise sessions scheduled that aren't mentioned as they aren't relevant to Harry's POV. Perhaps exercise is purely voluntary? Catherine From pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it Sat Dec 8 12:32:27 2001 From: pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it (=?iso-8859-1?q?Susanne=20Schmid?=) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:32:27 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] what's the deal with yellow teeth? In-Reply-To: <20011208.010630.-16666589.5.kokobreen@juno.com> Message-ID: <20011208123227.5623.qmail@web14702.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31128 christine breen wrote: Message-ID: <9ut263+k919@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31129 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "catorman" wrote: > The other point about exercise - we have discussed on this list > before, in relation to the heaviness of the traditionally British > Hogwarts food, that it is a wonder that all the children aren't > grossly overweight. It was surmised by a few people that performing > magic, and the concentration it requires probably takes a great deal > of physical as well as mental energy, thereby making the need for > exercise of a more traditional kind redundant. We also know that these kids cover a lot of ground in a day, traipsing from one class to another in that big castle, and that in particular they spend a lot of time going up and down the staircases! Also, they seem to have limited access to between-meal snacks and have no opportunity to become couch potatoes. In sum, both their food and their lifestyle are similar to the pre-TV era when overweight was much less of a problem. Despite what Fleur says, it's not the type of food that matters so much as the quantities eaten (i.e., total calories); if the kids are left to their own devices (e.g., nobody nagging them to clean their plates), they're apparently less likely to overeat. From Calypso8604 at aol.com Sat Dec 8 13:19:15 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:19:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] what's the deal with yellow teeth? Message-ID: <156.55d1050.29436d53@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31130 In a message dated 12/8/2001 7:33:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, pigwidgeon37 at yahoo.it writes: > Sorry to shatter anybody's illusions, but Sirius has them as well: PoA, > ch.18, right at the beginning: "I meant to," he growled, his yellow teeth > bared, "but little Peter got the better of me..." > Well, he hasn't much access to a toothbrush. The man's on the run! He's still sexy ^_^. But will be more so when he gets a toothbrush. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 8 16:20:17 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 16:20:17 -0000 Subject: what's the deal with yellow teeth? In-Reply-To: <20011208123227.5623.qmail@web14702.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9utek1+fp68@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31131 Susanne wrote (about yellow teeth): > > > Sorry to shatter anybody's illusions, but Sirius has them as well: PoA, ch.18, right at the beginning: "I meant to," he growled, his yellow teeth bared, "but little Peter got the better of me..." > > Still find him sexy?? Mwahahahaha > Sirius has yellow teeth because he hasn't brushed his teeth in 12 years. Not his fault. Snape, however, has yellow teeth because he cannot brush his teeth. He also can't bathe. That is because Snape is half-dementor, and dementors dissolve in water. Now, I recall that Moody is missing several back teeth. L.O.O.Ns, is anyone in the wizarding world described as having crooked teeth? From trusg at hotmail.com Sat Dec 8 16:29:44 2001 From: trusg at hotmail.com (trucoolsg) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 16:29:44 -0000 Subject: Fiction and entertainment in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <9usngd+50mk@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9utf5o+u02o@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31132 >>>I don't agree with the bulk of this message, because one of the >>>things I like about the books is that all the children aren't >>>obsessed with their Gameboys and TVs. etc. I agree, I like this about the books too. Also, to clear up an earlier point suggesting that life at British/European boarding school must be boring if it is without TV's and videos...this is not the case now, most boarding schools have a television in their common rooms, as far as I'm aware!! I would be surprised if many didn't. As far as evening entertainment at Hogwarts is concerned I think we are far underestimating the capacity of everyone owning a wand that can do magic creates for having fun. From what I understand, wizard children only get their first wands when they're going to wizard school, so there must be anovelty in this that doesn't wear off straight away, owning something you've not been allowed to get near before (" 'How many times Kevin? You don't - touch - daddy's - wand' " - GoF pg 75) What about Exploding Snap? Fred and George's canary creams? And I bet there's a damn good wizarding version of Snakes and Ladders out there somewhere, if only we knew about it! Actually I find this whole "How else do the Hogwarts students spend their time" debate rather interesting. Anyone got any ideas about how they might spend time other than in ways JKR's told us? >>>An omission which does concern me though, is lack of fictional >>>reading material. AFAIR, the only reference to fiction in the >>>Wizarding World is the "Mad Muggle" comic books which Ron has in his >>>bedroom. >>>Does it exist? It must do, surely. I would have thought that >>>Hermione in particular would be interested in reading novels >>>>(particularly historical ones) by members of the Wizarding World. I am certain it exists, we just haven't heard it mentioned at all yet. Certainly "Witch Weekly" if it is anything like the muggle alternatives aimed at muggle housewives of a certain age will contain stories and entertaining literature - Ron says his mother "buys it for the recipes" in GoF. It sounds rather scarily like "My Weekly" or "Woman's Weekly" to me! We know Hermione reads and re-reads her textbooks, which are non- fiction. It is true that fictional literature is not mentioned as part of her reading, but I would be surprsised if it didn't exist. Just because "Fantastic Beasts and Where to find the" and "Hogwarts: A History" are all we hear about doesn't mean other fictional books aren't in the well-stocked school library or in the bookshop on Diagon Alley (name escapes me just now). Think how much time Hermione in particular spends there, researching and working. Occasionally I'm sure she picks up something a little less high-maintenance to keep herself occupied. The truth is, it would interfere with the plot if Hermione read other things frequently, as she would be far less likely to stumble across a useful piece of information about the current emergency whilst immersed in a fictional novel by Melissandra Drinkwater (or whoever). It also, at first at least, makes her character a little more clear-cut. There can be no doubt of her being the bookworm of the trio when she picks up tomes on Alchemy as "light reading", can there?! In the context of the novel she can't be seen to be reading light-hearted things too often. Just one last thing...fictional writing certainly plays a good role in HP - Harry and Ron's divination homework and the works of Gilderoy Lockhart seem two particularly sparkling examples!! From trusg at hotmail.com Sat Dec 8 16:41:22 2001 From: trusg at hotmail.com (trucoolsg) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 16:41:22 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra and the Swishing Sound In-Reply-To: <9us1dt+jmss@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9utfri+jo8c@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31133 > > Before you howl with mirth, consider that in an interview (my advisor > would tsk-tsk briskly over the missing citation here), Rowling noted > that an Animagus (fem. Animaga?) cannot *choose* the animal whose > form he will take. That *does* go with the daemon theory. Anyone who's read Phillip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" trilogy will remember that no-one chooses what form their daemons take when they "settle" and assume a single form; it is somehow "decided" and ends up being exactly right for the person. Presumably the same applies to the Animagi in HP - we can assume to a point that the characters who are animagi are like the animal they transform into. Certainly Peter Pettigrew makes a good rat, and Sirius a loyal, faithful dog, but hmm, yeah, it does sort of throw off the idea that they picked who they transformed into so they made decent companions for the werewolf Lupin..!! Also sorry if this has been discussed recently. ~Raven Singer~ From gwynyth at drizzle.com Sat Dec 8 16:56:27 2001 From: gwynyth at drizzle.com (Jenett) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:56:27 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Fiction and entertainment in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <9utf5o+u02o@eGroups.com> References: <9utf5o+u02o@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31134 At 4:29 PM +0000 12/8/01, trucoolsg wrote: >I agree, I like this about the books too. Also, to clear up an >earlier point suggesting that life at British/European boarding >school must be boring if it is without TV's and videos...this is not >the case now, most boarding schools have a television in their common >rooms, as far as I'm aware!! Question is, though, how often that TV gets used. I went to boarding school in the US for two years. We did, in fact, have a TV in our common room (though we only had a VCR because I lived nearby, and brought the old one I'd inherited from my parents up with me. Otherwise we'd have had to depend on the niceness of our house counsellors to let us use theirs, if we wanted to watch a video) But even with it there it didn't get a whole lot of use. This was a school where we had classes from 8 until around 3, sports or other afternoon commitments (like community service) until 5, then dinner, and then most people had 3-5 hours of homework every night. (And some of us had music rehearsals on top of that) It just didn't leave a whole lot of time for TV. The average person in my dorm might have watched 2-3 hours in a week, barring a movie on the weekend. No one watched shows 'regularly' - stuff kept coming up which meant we couldn't guarantee being free to watch at the same time every week, which for a lot of people reduces the "I have to turn on the TV" desire. And when the TV did go on the blink, as it did a couple of times, it wasn't a big crisis in anyone's life - we all found other things to do. (Hang out, play cards, work on a project, go to the library, whatever) If that wasn't a big deal for kids from families where many of them had had TVs in their rooms by that point, I can't see it really being a major issue at Hogwarts, especially when a fair portion of the student population (the kids from wizarding families). There's lots of other stuff you can do. TV was a nice luxury, but it didn't seem essential to anyone's happiness, and no one had trouble finding other stuff for fun. It does sound like the amount of homework is relatively high for the amount of free time - there are several mentions of Hermione/Ron/Harry having something of a hard time finding sufficient free time for their independent research. -Jenett -- ----- gwynyth at drizzle.com ******* gleewood at gleewood.org ------ "My friend, there is a fine line between coincidence and fate" Ardeth Bay - _The Mummy Returns_ -------------------- http://gleewood.org/ -------------------- From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Sat Dec 8 17:46:14 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 17:46:14 -0000 Subject: Fiction and entertainment in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9utjl6+pgpb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31135 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jenett wrote: > At 4:29 PM +0000 12/8/01, trucoolsg wrote: > >I agree, I like this about the books too. Also, to clear up an > >earlier point suggesting that life at British/European boarding > >school must be boring if it is without TV's and videos...this is not > >the case now, most boarding schools have a television in their common > >rooms, as far as I'm aware!! > > Question is, though, how often that TV gets used. > And when the TV did go on the blink, as it did a couple of times, it > wasn't a big crisis in anyone's life - we all found other things to > do. (Hang out, play cards, work on a project, go to the library, > whatever) > > If that wasn't a big deal for kids from families where many of them > had had TVs in their rooms by that point, I can't see it really being > a major issue at Hogwarts, especially when a fair portion of the > student population (the kids from wizarding families). I think you are right, in that the wizarding families wouldn't miss something they've never had - if they've never had it. However, it is by no means certain that they don't have some form of TV at home. Afterall, they have the Wizarding Wireless don't they? That brings me on to another point - how is it no one takes a Wizarding Wireless to Hogwarts? D'you think they have a sports channel which everyone would be glued to on a Saturday afternoon so they can listen to live commentaries of their Quidditch team's matches? Also, what about listening to their favourite groups such as the Weird Sisters? Do groups such as these sell some kind of Wizarding World CD? Do the students only get to listen to their favourite bands during the holidays? What about classical music? I'm pretty sure that these are the kind of things the students would miss. I'm assuming that they don't have wirelesses at school, because the concept was new to Harry when he visits the Weasleys' home for the first time - after his first year at Hogwarts. Catherine From margdean at erols.com Sat Dec 8 20:09:11 2001 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 15:09:11 -0500 Subject: Dissolving Dementors References: <9utek1+fp68@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <3C127367.F14B073A@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31136 cindysphynx wrote: > Snape, however, has yellow teeth because he cannot brush his teeth. > He also can't bathe. That is because Snape is half-dementor, and > dementors dissolve in water. Oh, now I've got this image of Harry throwing a bucket of water over a Dementor (or Snape), evoking a plaintive scream of "I-I-'m me-e-e-lt-ing!" --Margaret Dean From kokobreen at juno.com Sat Dec 8 19:25:00 2001 From: kokobreen at juno.com (christine m breen) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:25:00 -0600 Subject: Sirius has yellow teeth therefore... Message-ID: <20011208.132503.-249871.1.kokobreen@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31137 He is/was a Death Eater too! That sends chills up my spine because I really like Sirius and hope he is good, but according to my yellow teeth theory, the guy is no good. Spooky. Who can Harry trust? Christine From catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk Sat Dec 8 20:32:42 2001 From: catherine at cator-manor.demon.co.uk (catorman) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 20:32:42 -0000 Subject: Sirius has yellow teeth therefore... In-Reply-To: <20011208.132503.-249871.1.kokobreen@juno.com> Message-ID: <9uttda+5k9p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31138 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., christine m breen wrote: > He is/was a Death Eater too! That sends chills up my spine because I > really like Sirius and hope he is good, but according to my yellow teeth > theory, the guy is no good. Spooky. Who can Harry trust? > Christine Sirius has yellow teeth because he has been in prison for 12 years, and has probably been unable to practise good dental hygiene - I'm sure it was very low on his list of priorities. Honestly, I think all this yellow teeth business is a bit far-fetched (but bear in mind this is coming from someone who thinks Snape is at least partly a vampire!) Catherine From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 8 20:59:17 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:59:17 -0000 Subject: Ron & Dumbledore (and Lily's) Hair colour. References: <9uglbu+5kuj@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <008601c1802b$33c54580$0829073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31139 Susan Wrote: > I've been re-reading the HP books, and noticed the physical > similarities between Ron & Dumbledore. Both were tall and thin. Both > had red hair (although Dumbledore's has turned white with age) and > both had long noses. One thing that really confuses me with Ron, Dumbledore and Lily is this continual assumption that they all have the same colour (Ginger) hair. We are told that the Weasley's all have flaming hair, ok that's fine, flaming red normally means a really bright ginger colour. Dumbledore, however, is described as having auburn hair with is not ginger. Auburn is "a moderate reddish-brown colour" (The Collins Concise Dictionary) which is basically a lighter version of Lily's hair colour as we are told that Lily has dark red hair. Dark red normally means a browny red colour (basically the colour it was in the film) my mum used to have dark red hair (before it went grey). Neither Dumbledore nor Lily could possibly be described as having Ginger hair. My mum used to have dark red hair and it was certainly not ginger and I personally have Auburn hair, which is also not ginger (although if you et it in REALLY bright Autumn sunlight in the morning it does go bright red as the sun reflects off it but that is the only time) One other thing I have discovered while I was looking in the dictionary is that it has the following written next to "Auburn" which may be interesting concerning Dumbledore as the full meaning that it has written is: 1. a moderate reddish-brown colour. 2. auburn hair (original meaning: Blond - from alborne meaning blond which came from ALBUS meaning white in Latin). I'm pretty certain that has probably been mentioned before and maybe even by JK herself but I thought I would put it in anyway. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 8 21:05:35 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:05:35 -0000 Subject: JK may not have meant Book 4 (WAS Harry as Survivor) References: <9uglj0+ne9g@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <008d01c1802c$15676ae0$0829073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31140 Lisa wrote: > Interesting point & well-taken. Besides that, if memory serves, the > hero rarely dies an untimely at the end of any epic. I'm wary of who > will die. When Ms. Rowling said a "beloved character" would die in > GoF, I was certain it would be Ron, Hagrid, or Dumbledore & I was > almost afraid to read on. When I saw who it was I was almost > disappointed because I didn't consider that character to be "beloved" > at all. I certainly didn't hate him, but it was more that I had no > opinion of him whatsoever. I think this was another of JK's little red herrings as she said a loved character would die but she never said this person would die in book 4. It seems that she deliberately did not say so that people would jump to that conclusion and duly people did. I feel this because even now in interviews since book 4 was released she still says that she is going to have to kill of characters that she loves for certain things to happen in the books. I'm not going to get on to the who will die argument as that has been going on for ages and there is a current discussion on it, all I'll say is that I am in the Dumbledore to die (defiantly) and either Sirius or Lupin too but NOT both - that would be too much loss for Harry to deal with and would be cruelly unfair of JK, to deprive Harry of the last too decent links he has to his parents, Dumbledore might have been close but he wasn't James' best mate and I can't see Peter being too helpful. I'm not saying no one else will die but I think those are the definites. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cindysphynx at home.com Sat Dec 8 21:22:55 2001 From: cindysphynx at home.com (cindysphynx) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 21:22:55 -0000 Subject: How Do You Kill A Dementor? (WAS Dissolving Dementors) In-Reply-To: <3C127367.F14B073A@erols.com> Message-ID: <9uu0bf+2jtd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31141 Margaret wrote: > > Oh, now I've got this image of Harry throwing a bucket of water > over a Dementor (or Snape), evoking a plaintive scream of "I-I-'m > me-e-e-lt-ing!" > Although I'm mostly joking about water "melting dementors, I would think that all dark creatures have a soft underbelly, an Achilles heel, a weakness that allows them to be defeated. For dementors, we know that a Patronus drives them back. But shouldn't there also be a way to kill dementors? Lupin says they like dark, filthy places. A Patronus wards them off, but as we saw in PoA, it doesn't always work when there are lots of dementors (unless you just happen to have someone around who is using a timeturner). If there weren't a way to kill dementors, wouldn't they eventually just team up and dominate the wizarding world? Cindy (who is putting her money on bright light, which is probably straight out of an old Star Trek episode) From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 8 21:34:00 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:34:00 -0000 Subject: Female DADA in book 5 (WAS OotP Prediction/DADA vs. Evil Female) References: <9uglor+10o8i@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <00bd01c18030$0dda9960$0829073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31142 > > And I know that we're supposed to > > have a female DADA teacher in book five, but it seems highly > > doubtful that she'd be evil. > I made the same inferrence once and was politely corrected. JKR > stated there would be a female DADA teacher in the future, but she > did not say it would necessarily be in Book 5 - could be 6 or 7. See > http://www.t35.com/hol/c107.htm for a transcript. JK has now confirmed that it will defiantly be book five, unfortunatly I think she said this in a TV interview so I can't put the exact quote down because I don't have it but it was a very recent interview. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sat Dec 8 22:11:07 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:11:07 -0000 Subject: Astrology/Astronomy References: <1007414920.3489.61790.m10@yahoogroups.com> <3C0C14B9.EED927F3@sun.com> Message-ID: <010f01c18035$3d1828a0$0829073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31143 Eleri wrote: > > Doesn't Hogwarts have an Astrology class, or is that something > > that's strictly limited to the centaurs? Elizabeth wrote: > Astrology is covered in Divination. Remember those awful charts? And > Ron's hysterical quote about Neptune appearing with two moons or > whatever it was? It is Astronomy classes that they have not Astrology. Elizabeth is right that Astrology is covered in Divination but I think that Astronomy is what Eleri was thinking about when mentioning Astrology as tehy do sound very similar. Astronomy is mentioned (in the first book) in the introduction to the lessons, we are told it is at midnight on Wednesday, in North/Tallest tower. It is also mentioned again in book 2 when Ron and Harry are looking through the window at the sorting and Ron is going through all the positions where the teachers sit and says Sinistra is the Astronomy teacher. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 22:21:47 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 22:21:47 -0000 Subject: teeth In-Reply-To: <9utek1+fp68@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uu3pr+asei@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31144 Hermione had crooked/buck teeth, but she had them fixed magically, which leads me to wonder why Moody, Snape, and the rest haven't fixed their own. I think it's probably because they don't really care about their physical appearance much. -- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" wrote: > Susanne wrote (about yellow teeth): > > > > > > Sorry to shatter anybody's illusions, but Sirius has them as well: > PoA, ch.18, right at the beginning: "I meant to," he growled, his > yellow teeth bared, "but little Peter got the better of me..." > > > > Still find him sexy?? Mwahahahaha > > > > Sirius has yellow teeth because he hasn't brushed his teeth in 12 > years. Not his fault. > > Snape, however, has yellow teeth because he cannot brush his teeth. > He also can't bathe. That is because Snape is half-dementor, and > dementors dissolve in water. > > Now, I recall that Moody is missing several back teeth. L.O.O.Ns, is > anyone in the wizarding world described as having crooked teeth? From titacats at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 22:58:41 2001 From: titacats at yahoo.com (titacats) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 22:58:41 -0000 Subject: Wizarding Home Security In-Reply-To: <9urrtr+4oug@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uu5v1+g6lm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31145 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "kiricat2001" wrote: > I was thinking along the same lines with regard to Floo Powder. You > would think that there would also be some way to keep undesirables > from showing up in your fireplace. If not, again, anyone could show > up. There has to be a way to connect your fireplace to the Floo > Network, but also to prevent the whole wizard world from having > access. > Wizards seem to use their fireplaces not only as a means of transportation but also as a sort of telephone/videoconferencing system. I assume that there is an equivalent to having an unlisted number that only family and freinds would know. Cats From theboywholived at backteeth.com Sat Dec 8 23:01:01 2001 From: theboywholived at backteeth.com (Gabriel Rozenberg) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 23:01:01 +0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31146 [Elizabeth Dalton wrote:] >I take back what I wrote earlier about the wizard world being a >dictatorship. >(I'm tempted to go back to my earlier diagnosis of anarchy, and to throw >that >label at the British system as described by Gabriel, but as an American, I >think >I should just shut up about the failings of other people's political >systems.) Actually, "elected dictatorship" pretty much sums it up in Britain, at least on the surface. However, the system has hidden strengths. >On reflection, I know there are laws and a method for passing them. Arthur >Weasley is apparently not in violation of laws regarding enchanted Muggle >artifacts, for example, as long as he doesn't actually *fly* that car of >his. >(Of course, according to Molly, he *wrote* that law, including the loophole >he's >exploiting.) And he's working on some kind of "Muggle Protection Act" as >well. >So apparently Arthur's position in the Ministry is such that he can author >laws >and advocate for their passage. This certainly does suggest there is some kind of external body which approves the law, but I'm not sure JKR really has one in mind. British laws tend to start with departmental ministers and are put together with their civil servants. Then Parliament has a look at them. Since ministers have an a priori majority in the Commons, the Lords can be overruled, and the Queen may not use her veto, the bill will pass. So the legislature is not actually very important when it comes to making laws. An MoM system where ministers just wrote laws as they wanted would not feel so very jarring to the British mind as to the American. Of course, the balancing power in the UK is that of the Commons to choose the ministers (and the people to choose the Commons). If that's the case there ought to be some body which could choose to kick out rogue ministers if they went Bad. Once again I'd like to press my theory that the body which does this, which is the closest the wizards have to a legislature, is a dormant witenagemot which meets only in times of crisis. This would explain the apparent absence of MPs or whatever but would also explain why the ministers do feel constrained to act within the rule of law. It would also be appropriately archaic. [cindysphynx wrote:] >As I indicated, I'm in the camp that believes the wizarding world is >not a dictatorship. So let's see if any of my U.S.-based theories >haven't been entirely gutted. > >Cindy wrote: > > > >Also, Fudge tells Snape in PoA that he'll try to arrange for Snape >to > > >receive Order of Merlin, First Class, if Fudge can manage it. This > > >suggests that *someone* has authority over Fudge in these matters - >- > > >probably the wizarding legislature. I don't think Fudge is > > >necessarily supposed to be a dictator. I think he is just sort of > > >representative of the most of the government, rolled up into one > > >person for convenience and simplicity. > > > > > >Gabriel wrote: > > > All government Ministers have similarly broad powers. If a > >government > > minister wanted to get someone knighted, he'd send a note over to >the Prime > > Minister and ask if he could sort it out. It might happen if the PM > >felt he > > owed him a favour, etc. > > >Doesn't that prove my point that Fudge is not a dictator? He >expresses doubt that he can secure the highest honour for Snape, >which is something that wouldn't trouble a true dictator at all. Indeed. However, I think my point was that he might not be a dictator but still have far more control over his department (ie, Magic) than, say, that Alcoa man has over the US economy. To my mind Fudge's comment sounds like he'd have to grapple with a favours-for-favours _bureaucracy_ than with a legislature of any kind. I'm sure the MoM is highly bureaucratic, partly because if it were more efficient then it would be too powerful. Getting things done would in part require skilful handling of of personal loyalties and personalities. >Gabrielle [sic!!] wrote: > > > Indeed: in fact trials are much fairer in Britain, since the press >is > > stopped from printing anything which could prejudice the jury; the >judge > > can't overrule the jury's verdict as I think sometimes happens in >some US > > courts; etc. > > > >I need to gather up the other lawyers on the board for a frontal >assault to beat back the assertion that trials are much fairer in >Britain. :-) For instance, the judge's ability to overrule the jury >in the U.S. exists as a safeguard for the defendant. IIRC, the judge >can overrule a guilty verdict and free the defendant, but can never >pronounce the defendant guilty if the jury has found otherwise. Many >people also believe that having public trials and allowing media >access is also of benefit to the defendant in many cases, as it >prevents "railroading." I could bore everyone senseless with a list >of criminal law safeguards in the U.S. that may (or may not) be >present in Britain. But I can't get on board with the idea that the >British way is "much fairer." Not yet, anyway. :-) I put that in to provoke you :-). Largely of course both countries have fine judicial systems, and I take the point about overruling only ever going in one direction. I'm not too convinced about "railroading" however. In the UK, the judge will often rule that certain evidence may not be revealed to the jury (eg, past convictions of the accused). If the press were allowed to print such things it would clearly remove a safeguard on the innocent. Oh, and we do _of course_ have "public trials and media access"; the difference is that in the UK nothing can be reported subjectively until the case is over. >I think that we can surely agree, however, that trials in the U.S. >and in Britain are *much* more fair than wizarding trials. > Indeed. It does seem like the MoM runs the trials. That's not an encouraging thought. However, the jury did at least have the chance to rule for Bagman despite what seemed like a somewhat one-sided trial (judge v accused with no lawyers to be seen). >Cindy wrote: > > > >Hmmm. Well, if the Ministry of Magic is equivalent to the U.S. > > >government, then it might very well have separation of powers after > > >all. Crouch Sr. sounds like the head of the judicial branch. > > > >Gabrielle wrote: > > > But he's a minister! Seems unlikely. > > >I don't think I expressed myself well there. I meant that when >Crouch Sr. was the Head of Magical Law Enforcement during the >Voldemort years, he was akin to our friend John Ashcroft, the U.S. >Attorney General and head of the Department of Justice. I have no >idea how that correlates to the British legal system, but I'd love to >know. > >Cindy Oh, no, I don't really think you do. But before that. As regards Crouch Sr: rereading GoF, I think you're probably right to see Crouch in an Ashcroft role. But Ashcroft is surely not the head of the judicial branch in the US? I thought that was Rehnquist/the Supreme Court. I think that Crouch's role, rather than showing that there is a separation of powers in the wizarding world, actually implies far more that there is no such thing. It adds to the view that the MoM is an executive which enforces the law through its own courts, as well as passing new ones here and there. Hence my starting salvo, that the attempt to impose a US model (ie, of three separate branches of government) just won't work here. Now, just in case you were wondering how it correlates, here goes. The Attorney General is appointed by the Prime Minister. He's the government's chief legal adviser. He's usually a member of the Commons like most ministers. We do not have a Department of Justice. The head of the judicial branch is the Lord Chancellor, and he advises the PM who advises the Queen on the selection of senior judges. (Odd but true. He advises the Queen direct on appointing junior judges. The Queen never refuses the advice of any of her ministers btw.) The Lord Chancellor may sit in criminal cases as the most senior member of the judiciary, despite being speaker of the House of Lords (to which he will have been appointed, normally by a previous Prime Minister) and a member of the (executive) Cabinet. The office of the Lord Chancellor, having been around since the year 605, is something of a mess, as you can now see. The LC embodies the (admittedly, rather controversial) 'fused powers' of the UK system which Americans simply refuse to believe can coexist with democracy and the rule of law. I think this kind of antiquated medieval mishmash is just the thing JKR has in mind. Gabriel _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 23:29:58 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 23:29:58 -0000 Subject: Veela questions Message-ID: <9uu7pm+p0rt@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31147 I've been wondering-- what exactly are veela? All we really know from GoF is that they are beautiful women who turn into harpies when they're angry. They appear to have all sorts of powerful magical qualities, but they are not listed in FBWTFT, so they aren't "beasts." Fleur Delacour says that her wand core is made from the hair of a veela, her "grandmuzzer." All of the other beasts that are used in wand cores (unicorns, dragons, phoenixes) are powerfully magical creatures, so it would appear that veela must be as well if their magic can be harnessed to cast spells. However, while JKR uses their power over the minds of men, especially Ron, as a running gag throughout GoF, might this power be some form of Dark magic? It has some of the same properties as the Imperius curse. Fleur is only part-veela, and she is still able to control men, or at least get them to do things she wants them to. She doesn't appear to have any malicious intent, but again the magic in veela must be very strong if Fleur is able to retain these veela qualities from her grandmother. It seems to me that an "evil" veela would have an awful lot of power if she chose to go over to the dark side. I also wonder what other kinds of powers veela have, especially when they transform into the harpy-creatures we see on the Quidditch field. Other members have brought up the fact that Harry seems less affected by veela than Ron, except during the first time he sees them at the Quidditch World Cup. But at Hogwarts, he doesn't appear to be bewitched by Fleur much at all, as compared to the rest of the boys. Again, I am put in mind of the Imperius curse, which Harry is able to fight off several times during GoF, and I wonder if his control of mind when he is under this spell is also the reason why he is largely unaffected by Fleur. Any thoughts? Marina From lazaraspaste at yahoo.com Sat Dec 8 23:39:39 2001 From: lazaraspaste at yahoo.com (lazaraspaste) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 23:39:39 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uu8br+e1n1@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31148 > But before that. As regards Crouch Sr: rereading GoF, I think you're > probably right to see Crouch in an Ashcroft role. Delurking just to put in my two cents. I always felt that Crouch's role during the Pensieve trials was far more analogous to Joseph McCarthy during the Communist witch hunts of the 1950's or even Kenneth Starr. Those trial scenes played for me like a Senate Commitee Hearing Investigating Death Eater Activities rather than a traditional criminal trial. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but I think that in Senate Hearings they have the right to sentence if they find someone guilty. Obviously, I have no idea what that parallels in the British legal structure are or even if there is a parallel. Back to lurking. Lazaras Paste From Calypso8604 at aol.com Sat Dec 8 23:42:39 2001 From: Calypso8604 at aol.com (Calypso8604 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:42:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Veela questions Message-ID: <8d.1091264c.2943ff6f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31149 In a message dated 12/8/2001 6:30:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, lipglossusa at yahoo.com writes: > Any thoughts? I have several theories on veela. One, is that they are in fact beings, not quite human but practically. Part-human, part-harpie judging by their angered forms. I also think that veela can somehwhat control their charm. The veela at the Quidditch match affected Harry when they were putting their charms on full-blast, but Fleur has never tried to attract a large group of men and Harry is unaffected by her normal charm because he has a stronger resistance to magic than Ron. I don't think they can ever *completely* "shut off" their veela charm though....Just make it stronger at times. I also toyed with the theory that perhaps the veela charm gets stronger when they are flirting or something, but I'm not sure about that I also think that veela have powerful enchantment/charm ability coming from their enchantment over men. Fleur nearly enchanted a dragon to fall asleep, something dragon keepers couldn't do! I think she must "channel" her veela charms though her wand with the veela hair core to produce powerful charms such as that. Calypso [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aiz24 at hotmail.com Sun Dec 9 00:06:49 2001 From: aiz24 at hotmail.com (Amy Z) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 19:06:49 -0500 Subject: Muggles, David hunting, killing wizards, humanism, House-Elves, Parselmouths Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 31150 Emily (persephone) wrote: >The general consensus seems to be wizards good, muggles bad. I am so glad you brought this up! My dh, who finally read PS under pressure 6 days before the movie came out, was uncomfortable with the WW's attitude that Muggles are inferior. I was actually delighted, because it gave me an opportunity to say "Actually, I believe that Rowling agrees with you, it's quite clear that this attitude is wrong, and this issue gets brought to the surface in the next book," hint hint. I even told him that one of Voldemort's main motivations is hatred of Muggles. I hope this ropes him in to read on (mwahahahahaha). The only line in the books that really bothers me this way is Hagrid's "it's your bad luck you grew up in a family o' the biggest Muggles I ever laid eyes on." Unlike McGonagall's "the worst kind of Muggles," which is not very polite but refrains from generalizations about Muggles, this equates "Muggle" with "bad": the less Muggle-ish you are, the better. Another instance I don't like is JKR's own "Don't let the Muggles get you down!" (said as parting words in an interview). Perhaps she's simply expressing solidarity with the wizard children in her audience who have to tolerate life among the people who don't understand them , but it does imply that Muggles per se are a drag. (Ron's letter to Harry saying the same thing is *almost* okay because he's talking about the Dursleys, not Muggles in general, though it's still kind of like writing to your black friend whose entire family is white, "Don't let the white folks get you down!"--it's a racist thing to say, even if they *are* perfectly horrible people.) All the other anti-Muggle statements I can think of seem to be statements we're supposed to disagree with, and/or are in the mouths of characters we are supposed to despise. >I know we have the muggle borns, like Hermione or Lily, but even that seems >to have an attitude like "you dont have to be ashamed of your muggle >heritage - youre still a real witch no matter what your parents were." Hmm, I'm not getting this. When Hagrid says this kind of thing about Hermione right after Malfoy calls her a Mudblood (CS 7), it seems to be in the spirit of "you're not inferior even though he says you are." The difference is subtle, but important because it doesn't buy into Malfoy's view of Muggles; the issue is whether Hermione belongs in the wizarding world, not whether she deserves a high rank. Can you or someone else who thinks this is anti-Muggle give some specific examples? Eileen wrote >Are there any I missed? I have only one quibble: the characterization of the Masons as "stupid and awful" seems unfair--we really don't know anything about them. They might not even like the Dursleys, for all we know. Besides Seamus's and the Creevey's dads and Hermione's parents, there are two other sets of Muggle parents who, as far as we know, are supportive of their wizard children: Dean's and Justin's. I don't think Muggles are portrayed less positively than wizards. Some are evil, some are stupid, some are kind, some are tolerant, some are intelligent. It's true that we don't get any well-rounded Muggle characters to get to know, but it's okay by me. I open these books to enter a world I don't live in, and as much as I like Muggles, I get to see them all the time. Dave H wrote: >Dave (Whose grammar school's favorite pastime was called "David hunting") ::pats Dave sympathetically, offers him a Chocolate Frog:: Sonja wrote: >Someone said that besides the usual ways (normal ways to kill muggles) >there are probably other magical ways. (Implying that wizards can die from >the same things that kill muggles.) In most circumstances, I do not >believe that a wizard can die in the "usual" way. In SS/PS, Chapter 4 - >Keeper of the Keys, Hagrid said, >"'CAR CRASH!' roared Hagrid, . . . 'How could a car crash kill Lily an' >James Potter? It's an outrage! A scandal!'" >This is assuming that what Hagrid says is accurate, but I believe it is. It was me, and I agree that Hagrid's probably being accurate here. My thinking is that wizards aren't by nature immune to being killed in a car crash, however, but are very unlikely to be because they use protections not available to Muggles. If Lily were walking down the street, no special spells on her, and a car veered onto the sidewalk and hit her, she'd be hurt the same as any woman. But if L&J had any reason to travel by car, they'd invoke various protections against being crushed and so forth. It's "a scandal!" for three reasons: magical folk are not easily killed by such accidents to begin with; James and Lily were a very good wizard and witch and so it's a slander against their Charms talents; and they died not by accident, but as a direct result of their brave struggle against a powerful wizard who murdered them. It's like suggesting that the firefighters who died trying to save people from the WTC died in an accident--it denies their heroism. A fourth reason could be what others have stated, which is that J&L wouldn't be likely to be in a car, but that doesn't quite qualify as scandalous, just unlikely. Hagrid himself is on the Underground not 24 hours later. fourfuries wrote: >It is highly debatable that HP turns on Humanist notions of "to thine >own self be true". Tom Riddle has done a very nice job of being true >to himself, having achieved several of his life long goals, but I >don't think any of us confuse his success with merit. Nice to see you back--it's been awhile! You too, Koinonia! To the extent that humanism's central tenet is "to thine own self be true" (not a bad summary, though it isn't what I would have said), it is not to be confused with "do your own thing" or still less, "look out for number one." It tends to be paired with an article of faith that despite the evil that men (and women) do, the core of a human soul is good. Some humanists have a very optimistic view of human nature, believing that humans are born good; others, including yours truly, believe that evil is inborn and real but that the religious task is to realize our "best selves." True integrity therefore leaves no room for evil, and Tom Riddle is not being true to his deepest self. This squares with my understanding of him as someone who is fundamentally alienated from his own true nature, as seen in his bitter hatred of his father and his own Muggle heritage. There is a distinctly humanist message in the story of TR, namely that one cannot be a whole nor a good person as long as one denies one's true nature. It's a message that's perfectly compatible with Christianity, to be sure, but it's also humanist. (Humanism isn't incompatible with Christianity, for that matter, but here I am drifting OT.) Long ago, Margaret wrote: >Ask yourself this: if you were a being from another planet, >whose culture didn't have marriage in any form (hard to imagine, >I know), and came to Earth, and the first Earthling you met was a >victim of severe spousal abuse [Dobby], what impression would you >get of the institution as a whole? Excellent point. There is one difference, however: assuming Dobby is telling the truth about house-elves' experience and isn't just globalizing based on his own miserable situation, "house-elves must be *set* free" (CS 2, emphasis mine); they can't just request their freedom, or a transfer for that matter. If someone could say that about marriage, they would be talking about a world in which there might be good marriages, bad marriages, and criminally cruel marriages, but in which even the best marriage was not equal: only one partner is allowed to initiate divorce. Also long ago, Elizabeth wrote: >And note how quickly even Hermione picked up the prejudice against Parselmouths. I don't see evidence that either Ron or Hermione is prejudiced against Parselmouths. Their shock that Harry speaks Parseltongue comes in a very specific context: the Heir of Slytherin is on the rampage and one thing they know about him/her is that he/she is likely to be a Parselmouth. Even then, their concern isn't that Harry is a bad person but that it means trouble for him with the rest of the school. Actually, now that I think about it, it's interesting that neither of them seems to worry that Harry might be the Heir of Slytherin. As Hermione herself says, for all they know, he might be--yet if any of Harry's friends entertains the thought, none betrays the slightest mistrust of him. The most disturbing prejudice in the books, to me, is that against Slytherins, especially since JKR seems to affirm the Sorting system which, while attending to one's choices as well as one's abilities, does seem to channel people into a particular path at a very early age. However, we may be being set up. Snape, after all, is emerging as one of the great heroes of the story. I hope Harry and we are going to be challenged to question our assumptions about Slytherins before the end. Amy Z ---------------------------------------------- However, it is easy to repulse the Pogrebin with simple hexes or Stupefying Charms. Kicking has also been found effective. -Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them ---------------------------------------------- _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From butagirl at aol.com Sun Dec 9 00:50:45 2001 From: butagirl at aol.com (butagirl at aol.com) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:50:45 EST Subject: Snape/Malfoy relationship Message-ID: <144.602324a.29440f65@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31151 "koinonia02" wrote: << I have never believed that Snape just loves Draco (though I do believe Snape will be there for him) and Lucius. I don't think Lucius has pulled the wool over Snape's eyes into thinking he is no longer a DE. Malfoy hasn't fooled Snape. Not now. Not this time. I could see Lucius Malfoy convincing a young Snape to join the DE's and now Snape is truly wanting to get back at the Malfoys. I don't believe that little move Snape made at the end of GoF at the mention of Malfoy had anything to do with Snape being surprised that Lucius was still a DE.>> I agree with this. I am fairly sure that Snape is well aware that Malfoy never left the DEs. It is therefore entirely possible that Snape wants to stay on Draco's good side because of who his father is. In this sense Draco has a powerhold over Snape - a few choice remarks from Draco to his father could do a great deal of damage to Snape's well-being. Sharon Brindle "Though I am butagirl at aol.com" From meboriqua at aol.com Sun Dec 9 01:34:42 2001 From: meboriqua at aol.com (jennyandraul) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 01:34:42 -0000 Subject: Muggles, David hunting, killing wizards, humanism, House-Elves, Parselmouths In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9uuf3i+215a@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31152 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Amy Z" wrote: >Some humanists have a very optimistic view of human nature, believing that humans are born good; others, including yours truly, believe that evil is inborn and real but that the religious task is to realize our "best selves." True integrity therefore leaves no room for evil, and Tom Riddle is not being true to his deepest self. This squares with my understanding of him as someone who is fundamentally alienated from his own true nature, as seen in his bitter hatred of his father and his own Muggle heritage. There is a distinctly humanist message in the story of TR, namely that one cannot be a whole nor a good person as long as one denies one's true nature. It's a message that's perfectly compatible with Christianity, to be sure, but it's also humanist.> Sorry for not snipping more, but if I snipped any more, it wouldn't make any sense. I feel guilty disagreeing with anything Amy Z says, but here I think differently - at least partly, anyway. I agree that evil can be inborn, because, IMO, we cannot have any good if there is no evil to go with it (you know, how we can't understand one without having the other). We are all capable of doing evil things, and certainly of thinking evil thoughts - I know I do - bwahahahaha! I digress. However, I think much evil behavior is related to how one was raised. Obviously, Tom Riddle had some major issues with his family, and from what I've seen with people I know, their behaviors seem to go directly back to their families and how they were treated. Harry, of course is an exception, but then again, he usually is. *Sigh* - I do love him. I also think that there is always the mental health factor that may result in what we perceive as evil behavior. Barty Crouch Jr is specifically described as having as "insane" smile after he recounts the terrible things he did to his father and with Voldemort in GoF. It bothers me that he is described that way, as it implies to me that he wasn't *really* responsible for his actions, but in reality, there are some crazy people out there who do some terrible things. I'm also a bit confused about what Amy said about Tom Riddle's "deepest self". Does that mean that maybe Riddle is ignoring the warm and fuzzy feelings he is capable of getting? Or does it mean that he has worked extremely hard to squash the empathy out of himself? Perhaps that's what true evil is - the way Riddle devoted his entire life to death and destruction, and has trained himself to delight in it. --jenny from ravenclaw, who hates what Yahoo did to our names ************************************** From rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 01:35:00 2001 From: rowena_grunnion_ffitch at yahoo.com (Rowena Grunnion-Ffitch) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:35:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's Mission, Reactions. In-Reply-To: <47.1482c62e.294075be@aol.com> Message-ID: <20011209013500.15509.qmail@web20803.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31153 --- Evil1ClaudeRains at aol.com wrote: > I got the impression that this was a little glimpse > into the fact that > Severus can be afraid of something. Maybe it's not > his *own* skin he's > really worried about. I have this theory that Snape might buy himself back into Voldy's favor and 'prove' which side he's on by providing some important information on Dumbledore, a weakness or vulnerability that Voldemorte could exploit, with D's consent of course! It would have to be something true to work which means Snape is not only placing himself in deadly danger but Dumbledore as well - and all the people and things who depend on Dumbley, including Harry. No wonder they're both apprehensive! __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From frantyck at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 02:01:40 2001 From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 02:01:40 -0000 Subject: Fiction and entertainment in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <9utf5o+u02o@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uugm4+4vsb@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31154 How about Ron's stack of comic books, _The Adventures of Martin Miggs the Mad Muggle_, in CoS? Hoot! Muggles are exotic enough to star in comics?? I suppose being able to do magic would make Supermanliness pale somewhat. It's an interesting idea: fantasy fiction in the magical world could be about commonplace Muggle things and situations. Odd reversal. Lots of promise there for fanfiction. Rrishi From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 04:38:06 2001 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:38:06 -0800 Subject: OT: Our Yahoo! handles In-Reply-To: <9uuf3i+215a@eGroups.com> References: <9uuf3i+215a@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <13170606369.20011208203806@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31155 Saturday, December 08, 2001, 5:34:42 PM, jennyandraul wrote: j> --jenny from ravenclaw, who hates what Yahoo did to our names Yahoo seems to have just done a software upgrade, and now it uses our Yahoo handles by default. Is it possible to change this setting? -- Dave From sparkledtongue at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 06:08:21 2001 From: sparkledtongue at yahoo.com (Jessica Powell) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:08:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] yellow teeth... In-Reply-To: <20011208.010630.-16666589.5.kokobreen@juno.com> Message-ID: <20011209060821.30850.qmail@web21003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31156 --- christine breen wrote: > Why did Rowling go out of her way to mention that > both Snape and Karkaroff > have yellow teeth? Do yellow teeth seem more > menacing? I know coffe and > smoking can stain teeth, so I'm going to assume > something about being a > death eater has stained their teeth yellow. > Drinking potions? Do > polyjuice potions stain teeth? Are we to assume > that since yellow teeth > was mentioned with Snape and Karkaroff, and they > were both DEs, that > anyone with yellow teeth is/was a DE? Maybe it's a > time delayed > curst--when someone leaves Voldemort and ceases to > be a DE their teeth > turn yellow? Who knows. > Christine > I don't think that JKR's purpose behind this was to tie all the death eaters together, but to illustrate their overall "yuckyness" and unpleasantness. Like in the short story , "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. The entire piece revolves around the repugnent color and uses it to illustrate depression, isolation, fear, sickness, insanity, and ultimately in death. I think JKR is using yellow to illustrate how miserable both Karkaroff and Snape are, and in the case if Serius, the description of Serius' teeth comes from Harry's POV before he finds out that Serius is good. So, to make a loong story short, I think it is not an indicator of guilt or a commonality among DE's but JKR's awesome ability to illustrate her characters in a subtle, yet dynamic manner. > ===== Jessica's Shake'n'Shack __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From catlady at wicca.net Sun Dec 9 07:22:55 2001 From: catlady at wicca.net (Rita Winston) Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 23:22:55 -0800 Subject: Entertainment - Veelas - Parliament Message-ID: <3C13114F.AE96FDAB@wicca.net> No: HPFGUIDX 31157 trusg (Tru S. G.?) wrote: > As far as evening entertainment at Hogwarts is concerned I think we > are far underestimating the capacity of everyone owning a wand that > can do magic creates for having fun. (snip) Actually I find this > whole "How else do the Hogwarts students spend their time" debate > rather interesting. Anyone got any ideas about how they might spend > time other than in ways JKR's told us? I think there are LOTS of activities that we don't know about because Harry doesn't participate in them. Some of these activities would be organized as clubs, with a student club president and a faculty sponsor, that begin by someone putting a notice on the notice board, and the clubs are inter-House so they would meet in the Great Hall after dinner or some of the many other public rooms in the Castle. We saw that with Lockhart's Duelling Club, but I am sure there are other clubs as well. I imagine that there is an official Student Orchestra and Student Choir, organized as clubs. Student chamber quartets and rock bands could be official clubs or just friends doing stuff together. Probably music lessons are available (perhaps for an extra fee) at levels from rank beginner on up. (Maybe the teachers come in from all over wizarding Britain just for the lessons, rather than living at Hogwarts or even in Hogsmeade.) After all, there wouldn't BE bands like the Weird Sisters if no wizarding folk ever learned to play guitar. A Drama Club to put on student plays. Btw, I like to fantasize about Snape forcing his Slytherins to gather at appointed times in their common rooms to read Shakespeare's plays (they're sitting down and reading from books, but otherwise are actors). Someone already mentioned pick-up Quidditch games, and I'm sure they would have broomstick racing as well (probably something like steeplechase, with risk of breaking their damn-fool necks). Informal non-hostile duelling, even without a Duelling Club. I can't help thinking they would have SOME non-magic sports, at least wrestling and foot-racing, just for the pleasure of using one's body. (Also for self-defence when caught without a wand.) Maybe even martial arts. I would like fencing and [winged] horse riding (and Heidi's Pegasus Polo) to be available. The fencing and riding could be lessons, maybe for extra fees, like the music lessons, and any Pegasus Polo league would have to be an organized club. There could be a whole season of an academic game like Geography Bee, starting early in the year with lots of bees that any kid can enter, then a number of elimination rounds until the finals produce a winner just before everyone has to cram for end-of-term exams. There are probably a number of lectures and concerts by outside people, as 1000 kids in one place from a wizarding population of 20,000 is an attractive concentration of customers. People whom the Headmaster would likely view as educational enough to let them speak on campus would include authors who are on book tours for biographies of last century's warriors and politicians, explorers showing slides of exotic places, and politicians hoping to brainwash the parents through their children. Lockhart probably had spoken at Hogwarts every year or two before accepting a teaching position. Adult amateur chamber orchestras would be grateful for the chance to perform in front of a non-paying audience; successful pop bands would charge admission. Maybe there would be small groups of students lining up a chaperone and permission to use one of the public rooms to hire a band (or get a volunteer band) and have a dance: that would explain why so many kids at the Yule Ball already knew how to dance. Catherine wrote: > I think you are right, in that the wizarding families wouldn't miss > something they've never had - if they've never had it. However, it > is by no means certain that they don't have some form of TV at > home. Afterall, they have the Wizarding Wireless don't they? That > brings me on to another point - how is it no one takes a Wizarding > Wireless to Hogwarts? D'you think they have a sports channel which > everyone would be glued to on a Saturday afternoon so they can > listen to live commentaries of their Quidditch team's matches? > Also, what about listening to their favourite groups such as the > Weird Sisters? Do groups such as these sell some kind of Wizarding > World CD? Do the students only get to listen to their favourite > bands during the holidays? What about classical music? I'm pretty > sure that these are the kind of things the students would miss. The wizarding folk wear robes and commute on what looks like a steam train. I think they are too far behind the times to have TV. (Altho' I have been trying to think up a good wizarding name for Viewing Distant Entertainment!) Even tho' Edison cylinders preceeded radio among Muggles (and player piano rolls before Edison cylinders), I get the feeling that the wizarding folk don't have any recorded music. They hear music live in person or live on Wizarding Wireless. They have to make their own music for background music for daily chores. Bearing in mind that the wizarding population is tiny (my guess is 20,000 in UK), even a hugely popular band could perform in many small nightclubs (does the Leaky Cauldron have live entertainment on weekends? there are also house concerts) and "small" "cozy" concert halls holding only a couple hundred people as audience and still be heard a couple of times a year by everyone who cared (and wasn't suffering from extreme poverty, I guess). Still, a band aimed primarily at teen-agers that didn't play at Hogwarts or at least in Hogsmeade would seem to need other jobs during the school year... The thing that gets me is, HOW do they follow their favorite Quidditch teams? They're all Quidditch mad and have favorite teams and favorite players and Ron knew all about Krum's career ... even if they can only attend matches while on holiday, even if they can't listen to the matches live on wireless (presumably because of some school rule against wireless), surely they would eagerly read written descriptions, preferably real-time by something like telegraph ("wire" came before "wireless") or at least in newspapers. AND Harry would know about it, his friends and team-mates would talk enthusiastically about the latest matches and show him the newspaper articles or drag him along to listen on Madam Hooch's wireless. I can see Harry not noticing the other activities because he's not interested in them because he thinks they're swotty or Ron can't afford them or he's too busy with team Quidditch practise, but I can't see him overlooking that one. Marina wrote: > I've been wondering-- what exactly are veela? All we really know > from GoF is that they are beautiful women who turn into harpies > when they're angry. They appear to have all sorts of powerful > magical qualities, but they are not listed in FBWTFT, so they > aren't "beasts." If they were "beasts", wouldn't it be kind of disgusting for humans to cross-breed with them? Veelas are real. Real folklore in Slavic countries, anyway, altho' I think usually transliterated 'vila'. They are beautiful young women who dance in the woods (therefore, sometimes called 'wood-nymphs' by English-speakers) and lure men into leaving their path to dance with them, of which one common outcome is that the veelas suddenly vanish and the man is all alone lost in the woods at night. They take the form of swans in order to fly. Upon arrival at their dancing ground (or swimming hole), they take off their swan skins to take more human form. A man who steals a veela's swanskin can keep her for a wife and she will do the housework and bear children, but if she ever gets the chance she will grab her swan skin and transform and fly away, leaving her children behind. People put out food offerings for the veelas, because the veelas can help or hurt the crops. They are sometimes said to be the spirits of young women who died childless, so that the powers of fertility they didn't use while alive can be used for the crops. They may be personifications of Nature, which would explain why they are said to be fairly nice in Greece (under the name of 'dryads') and get nastier northwards until they are quite sadistic in Russia. The phrase 'get the willies', meaning 'be scared' (do Brits say 'get the wind up?') comes from a Russian phrase referring to being pursued by veelas. Mind you, veelas are intensely similar to rusalki ('water-nymphs', 'nereids') who live in bodies of water and lure men to kiss them and lure small children to hug them, whereupon they sink back into their water, pulling down their victim to drown, which is nasty enough. Gabriel wrote: > Once again I'd like to press my theory that the body which does > this, which is the closest the wizards have to a legislature, is a > dormant witenagemot which meets only in times of crisis. Wit(ch)enagemot? I knew it was a pre-Norman Parliament, but checked One-Look Dictionaries http://www.onelook.com/index.html for the etymology. Gemot is meeting and Witana is counsellors, singular witta, from weid- , PIE root referring to wisdom, wit, and some other interesting things like 'to see'. My point is, we know the word 'wizard' comes from 'wise' and it was long believed that the word 'witch' came from 'wit', so calling it Witch-Meet would be a fine translation. However, One-Look also pointed me to an article http://www.encyclopedia.com/articlesnew/13951.html that says 'These facts discredit the old argument that the witenagemot was similar to the later representative Parliament and make it clear that the witan were more analogous to the later Curia Regis.' Presumably, that analogy to Parliament would be the 'Wizards' Council' that is frequently referred to in the 1200-1300-1400s part of QUIDDITCH THROUGH THE AGES? FANTASTIC BEASTS has a footnote (in "What is a Beaast?") that the Wizard's Council preceeded the Ministry of Magic. Both books refer to the position of 'Chief of the Wizards' Council' or 'Council Chief'. If only I could find the place where canon refers to a 'Warlocks' Council', I could go on to my theory that 'Warlocks' Council' is an alternate, older, or more formal name for Wizards' Council', and is referred to by Dumbledore's title of Chief Warlock (on his letterhead: "Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sorc., Chf. Warlock, Supreme Mugwump, International Confed. of Wizards"). (I also imagine that Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sorceror" is the top honor, better than mere Order of Merlin, First Class, and that Supreme Mugwump, International Confederation of Wizards is a title meaning President Emeritus (or Secretary-General Emeritus) of the Internation Confederation (or Federation) of Wizards (or Warlocks -- all those names appear in canon and I want to believe that they are the same thing) and the ICFW is a governing body more powerful than the UN.) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Question for JKR: 1) In the Potterverse, what is a 'warlock'? (warrior-wizard? MP-wizard?) 1.5) Is International Federation of Wizards, International Confederation of Wizards, and Internation Confederation of Warlocks all the same thing? 2) Why aren't Thunderbirds (aka Quetzalcoatls) in FANTASTIC BEASTS? 3) Are Boggarts (not in FB) Beings or Spirits? 4) Is the Ministry of Magic part of the Muggle government? 5) Does Molly Weasley have red hair like her husband and children? 6) About werewolves in the Potterverse: are they contagious when in human form, or only in wolf form? Is silver harmful to them? Are they transformed only at night or also in the daytime? 7) Is Professor Sinistra a witch or a wizard? 8) Why do they have to study so much Astronomy? Does the class include Astrology? Do they have to know the locations of the planets because they're going to travel there? 9) What is Arithmancy? 10) Is Hermione 10.4 months older or 1.6 months younger than Harry? 11) Is Fleur a Seeker on a Beauxbatons Quidditch team? For that matter, is Beauxbatons's Quidditch intramural like Hogwarts's or extramural? 12) Does the Fidelius Charm remove the information from people who used to know it before the Charm was cast? Does it conceal the information from all people or only the ones specified when the Charm was cast? ------------------------------------------------------------------ /\ /\ ___ ___ + + Mews and views ( @ \/ @ ) >> = << from Rita Prince Winston \ @ @ / \ () / ("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._ \ / `6_ 6 ) `-. ( ).`-.__.`) \/ (_Y_.)' ._ ) `._ `. ``-..-' _..`--'_..-_/ /--'_.' ,' (((' (((-((('' (((( From naycsh at rocketmail.com Sun Dec 9 06:48:45 2001 From: naycsh at rocketmail.com (quasisnow) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 06:48:45 -0000 Subject: Wizard Exercise/Entertainment Message-ID: <9uv1gd+uum6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31158 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "sonjahric" wrote: > I have noticed that wizards shun muggle activities even when they > don't have a good alternative. Ie. - wizard kids don't ride bikes. > Well, they ride brooms, but they can't do that everywhere. Wouldn't > a bike be fun too! The lake is frozen solid in winter, but they > don't seem to ice skate. Why not? If it is just b/c it is a > muggle activity, why don't they have something comparible. They do > have snowball fights and that is something muggles do. (Just a few > of the examples that have been bugging me.) Well, Peeves did play tennis (albeit he was playing against a wall) in PS/SS so I think that wizards/witches do actually have Muggle activites just that Harry hasn't come across them yet, or perhaps, he was just so used to seeing Muggle activities that he didn't think it necessary to say anything about them. Exploding Snap, Canary Creams, Wizard Chess are stuff he didn't experience in the Muggle world so he would definitely find them more interesting than say, Monopoly? Though I would give an arm to see an enchanted version of Monopoly.. And television and radio sets won't work at Hogwarts since as Hermione said that there is simply too much magic at Hogwarts for Muggle stuff to work properly. --siew. From jennydowns at hotmail.com Sun Dec 9 03:50:29 2001 From: jennydowns at hotmail.com (snozwoffle) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 03:50:29 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an animagus? Message-ID: <9uun25+7ono@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31159 I was reading book 2 and noticed that Tom Riddle said that Dumbledore was the transfiguration professor. This made me wonder D could possibly be an animagus, because if he is interested in transfiguration, why not? McGonagall, who is the transfiguration professor is is an animagus. But then I remembered that about the list of registered animagi that Hermione was talking about in book 3, and presumably it would have been mentioned if Dumbledore was listed on it. I can't see Dumbledore being an unregistered animagus, so I decided there was nothing in my theory. Also, if Dumbledore *was* an animagus, what type of animal do you think he would turn into? z:-) Jenny. From andrewty at i-manila.com.ph Sun Dec 9 12:14:46 2001 From: andrewty at i-manila.com.ph (Andrew Albert J. Ty) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:14:46 +0800 Subject: apologies for cross-posting: "scholarly" writings on HP References: <1007872705.2320.37247.m8@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <005101c180ab$ca26fc00$1503000a@Ty> No: HPFGUIDX 31160 Hi everyone, I haven't really participated much--this may be my first post actually--because I've yet to read GOF. Still, after watching the film, I became such a fan that I decided to read the books and am now thoroughly enjoying myself. I don't have time to give a more extensive background of myself, though I'd like to do so soon because there are some interesting questions I want to raise with regards to that. What I would like to do with this post is to point members to Lee Siegel's review-essay of the first three books, which may be found at http://www.thenewrepublic.com/magazines/tnr/112299/siegel112299.html. I need to reread it again, but I'd like to ask the other members if they know of other similar essays, especially those that have to do with the film (I teach film theory for a living). Stuff on the books, like the Siegel, are very much welcome, too, but please feel free to warn me since, as I've said, I haven't read GOF yet. Thanks, Andrew ----- "A Klee painting named 'Angelus Novus' shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage upon wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the angel can no longer close them. This storm irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress." - Walter Benjamin, "Theses on the Philosophy of History" From irbohlen at email.unc.edu Sun Dec 9 14:04:16 2001 From: irbohlen at email.unc.edu (irbohlen) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 14:04:16 -0000 Subject: Law, Human Rights and democracy in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <9uu8br+e1n1@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9uvr10+1kvi@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31161 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lazaraspaste" wrote: > > But before that. As regards Crouch Sr: rereading GoF, I think > you're > > probably right to see Crouch in an Ashcroft role. > > Delurking just to put in my two cents. I always felt that Crouch's > role during the Pensieve trials was far more analogous to Joseph > McCarthy during the Communist witch hunts of the 1950's or even > Kenneth Starr. Those trial scenes played for me like a Senate > Commitee Hearing Investigating Death Eater Activities rather than a > traditional criminal trial. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but > I think that in Senate Hearings they have the right to sentence if > they find someone guilty. Obviously, I have no idea what that > parallels in the British legal structure are or even if there is a > parallel. Back to lurking. > > Lazaras Paste I agree--I thought immediately of the McCarthy era extra-judicial proceedings. What about the Star Chamber? My British history is pretty rusty, but wasn't that a sort of extra-judicial proceeding during the Tudor era? Ivis the elderly From snowwy54 at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 15:46:07 2001 From: snowwy54 at yahoo.com (Susan Snow) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:46:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dumbledore an animagus? In-Reply-To: <9uun25+7ono@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <20011209154607.2341.qmail@web14707.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31162 --- snozwoffle wrote: > I was reading book 2 and noticed that Tom Riddle > said that > Dumbledore was the transfiguration professor. This > made me wonder D > could possibly be an animagus, because if he is > interested in > transfiguration, why not? McGonagall, who is the > transfiguration > professor is is an animagus. > > But then I remembered that about the list of > registered animagi that > Hermione was talking about in book 3, and presumably > it would have > been mentioned if Dumbledore was listed on it. I > can't see > Dumbledore being an unregistered animagus, so I > decided there was > nothing in my theory. > > Also, if Dumbledore *was* an animagus, what type of > animal do you > think he would turn into? > > z:-) > Jenny. > > > But it is possible that D was not in this centuries list because of his age. I think D is an animagus but we won't find out about it or awhile. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM Sun Dec 9 16:06:02 2001 From: Elizabeth.Dalton at EAST.SUN.COM (Elizabeth Dalton) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 11:06:02 -0500 Subject: LOLLIPOPS, Lily's past, teeth References: <1007821685.864.4367.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3C138BEA.B5379E51@sun.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31163 Poor Tabouli. It's not that I'm completely out of the torch-for-Lily camp, it's that I think resentment of James for being a pig-head and getting himself killed because he wouldn't listen to Snape would be enough of a source of resentment to get the ball rolling, even without anything about Lily. I don't think these theories are incompatable. (Though everytime I think about it, I recall the song "Lily's Hazel Eyes" from the musical "The Secret Garden." Anyone else have this running through their head, possibly influencing their thoughts?) Has anyone else here read "Prince Ombra" by Roderick MacLeish? Bentley, the child hero of that story, also has a mother who died when he was quite young, whom he (and everyone else) seems to idealize. In the process of Bentley and his teacher trying to figure out how the villain might try to attack him, they realize that one of his weaknesses is his ideas about his mother. Suddenly learning that she hadn't been so perfect would be quite a blow. So naturally, there *is* something in the past that he has to confront. I'm wondering if what we're going to learn about Lily might not be so pleasant after all. Harry idolizes both his parents. They probably weren't that perfect in real life. How well is he going to be able to deal with that? BTW, tea can also stain teeth. And some people are born with a tendency toward darker teeth. Mine were yellowish as a kid --people were always asking me if I'd just had a glass of orange juice-- even when brushed. (Fortunately, my "adult" teeth are lighter.) It does seem an odd thing to keep mentioning, but Rowling mentions teeth in descriptions more often than I expect most authors to. Elizabeth-the-Comparative-Magic-Professor-Wannabe From frantyck at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 16:41:15 2001 From: frantyck at yahoo.com (frantyck) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 16:41:15 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an animagus? In-Reply-To: <20011209154607.2341.qmail@web14707.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9v047b+skfd@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31164 > --- snozwoffle wrote: > > Also, if Dumbledore *was* an animagus, what type of > > animal do you > > think he would turn into? > > Jenny. Well, there is that little snippet in PS/SS when Dumbledore comes upon Harry by surprise in the Mirror of Erised room. Dumbledore says he does not need a Cloak to become invisible, but I rather wonder whether he might be able to take the form of some small (flying?) animal. Could be very useful, and obviously worth keeping quiet. Rrishi From susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 16:38:18 2001 From: susandianewilbanks at yahoo.com (susianew) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 16:38:18 -0000 Subject: Ron & Dumbledore (and Lily's) Hair colour. In-Reply-To: <008601c1802b$33c54580$0829073e@j0dhe> Message-ID: <9v041q+m4ph@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31165 --"Hollydaze" wrote: > One thing that really confuses me with Ron, Dumbledore and Lily is this continual assumption that they all have the same colour (Ginger) hair. I had wondered about that, and asked a friend who was a cosmetologist. She said that the 'red' color is caused by a pigment encoded on a recessive gene. As a person ages, less pigment is produced, so a child's bright red hair can fade to reddish- or muddy- brown in adulthood. I used the interview search engine to try & find a JKR comment on red hair but didn't see any referenced. Anyone else remember where JKR mentioned it? -Susan (still looking for evidence that Ron & Dumbledore aren't the same person) From glitter__ at hotmail.com Sun Dec 9 18:40:34 2001 From: glitter__ at hotmail.com (harry_potter_20022003) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 18:40:34 -0000 Subject: The Movie Message-ID: <9v0b72+cqkl@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31166 I think after seeing it yesterday what strikes me the most ( andyes,I liked the movie ) is that Harry in the movie didn't have asmuchdepth to his character as Ron or Hermione. It seems to me thatwe're always being reminded of 'famous' Harry, etc. but little of hismagic is actually demonstrated. He seems like mostly a verynice,sweetboy. I don't know. Maybe in time I'll re-think this. Maybethis wasn't so bad an introduction after all. From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 20:12:18 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:12:18 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an animagus? Yellow teeth; D's title.. In-Reply-To: <20011209154607.2341.qmail@web14707.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9v0gj2+4d8b@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31167 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Susan Snow wrote: > But it is possible that D was not in this centuries > list because of his age. I think D is an animagus > but we won't find out about it or awhile. Agreed - as mentioned before, he surprised Harry with the Mirror of Erised, flew to Hogwarts once discovering he had been tricked by a false letter + Dumbledore means bumblebee. So um - I believe it's quite clear that he's a bee animagus (registered during last century, when he was less than 18, if registration was required then). Sirius, Snape & Karkaroff have/had yellow teeth for the same, simple reason: They have not brushed their teeth often enough and possibly had too much tea. I kind of doubt them having coffee or smoking but those activities do tend to dye teeth. However, it's a sign of low hygiene more than anything, just as Snape's greasy hair! In Sirius' case more of lack of oppurtunity than anything else, I'm sure. Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sorceror... Obviously the 'Order of Merlin' is some sort of knight-hood. First Class: Dumbledore has the highest 'medal' ever given. Grand Sorceror: I believe this means he's the head of the Order, with the authority to grant it! Order of Phoenix... well well, is this another "knightly" order? From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Dec 9 20:27:59 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:27:59 -0000 Subject: The Pensieve-McCarthy Analogy In-Reply-To: <9uvr10+1kvi@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v0hgg+l8pr@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31168 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "irbohlen" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lazaraspaste" wrote: > > > But before that. As regards Crouch Sr: rereading GoF, I think > > you're > > > probably right to see Crouch in an Ashcroft role. > > > > Delurking just to put in my two cents. I always felt that Crouch's > > role during the Pensieve trials was far more analogous to Joseph > > McCarthy during the Communist witch hunts of the 1950's or even > > Kenneth Starr. Those trial scenes played for me like a Senate > > Commitee Hearing Investigating Death Eater Activities rather than a > > traditional criminal trial. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but > > I think that in Senate Hearings they have the right to sentence if > > they find someone guilty. The McCarthy analogy to the Pensieve trials is 180 degrees wrong. McCarthy made *false* accusations of Communist Party membership and/or of actively and consciously working to advance the Communist Party's agenda in the US. (Ol' Tailgunner Joe couldn't even keep his own numbers straight: there were as many as 205 or as few as 51 card- carrying communists in the State Department, according to his varying utterances.) The Senate, a legistlative body, is limited to fact- finding in its hearings ? it cannot sentence anyone to prison, a function which is given to our judicial system. (Although it can expose malfeasance that the judicial system can then pursue ? it can also grant immunity to prosecution in exchange for testimony). One may argue that the Pensieve Trials were improperly administered, that there were significant conflicts of interest (e.g., a father trying his son, etc.), etc. etc. But you can not argue that this was a "witch-hunt" (in the Muggles sense). There was genuine guilt! (which also renders the Ken Star analogy inoperable from the liberal perspective, though not from mine). Voldemort's followers were culprits in a malevolent and wicked politico-terrorist organization, and it was clearly the responsibility of the Ministry of Magic to bring these malefactors to justice. A much better analogy would be Nuremberg. Again, men whose association with an evil regime was a matter of record, and whose guilt was often clear were tried and usually convicted by a jerry-built assemblage of post hoc laws. Because the guilt of the Nazis was so evident, few at the time questioned the process through which this guilt was established. One of the few who did was Sen. Robert Taft of Ohio: read JFK's chapter about this in Profiles in Courage. >From a website on Nuremberg, we read: http://www.courttv.com/casefiles/nuremberg/legacy.html "In the view of most historians, Nuremberg's legacy is mixed. They are generally favorable to the attempt made by the Allies to bring some form of international judicial accounting for the horrors of the Nazi regime. To this day, Nuremberg remains the most thorough record of Hitler's rise to power, and the planning, launching and execution of World War II. As such, it was no small achievement, and one that was forged out of the chaos and rubble immediately following World War II. But some argue that the International Military Tribunal was a victor's justice, and the trial has been criticized for a variety of reasons. The list of those accused was somewhat arbitrary. There also were basic misgivings. The accused had been charged with violations of international law, but such law was binding on nations, not individuals. Individuals, it was argued, could be brought to justice only under the laws of their own country, not on the basis of a new order established after a war. It may have been imperfect justice, but there was no alternative." Right! We couldn't just let the Nazis off scot-free ? even an imperfect justice was better than avoiding the situation altogether. Same thing with the Wizard World of JKR. The most serious offense of the M.O.M was their refusal to let certain individuals stand trial. If Sirius Black (for example) had been allowed to testify, it might have alerted others to the possibility that Peter Pettigrew was still alive, and to have enabled him to be bought to justice. - CMC From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 20:30:29 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:30:29 -0000 Subject: Ron & Dumbledore (and Lily's) Hair colour. In-Reply-To: <9v041q+m4ph@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v0hl5+ae8t@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31169 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "susianew" wrote: > remember where JKR mentioned it? > -Susan > (still looking for evidence that Ron & Dumbledore aren't the same > person) Dumbledore has a brother near his own age. Aberforth is your evidence. If Albus were a time-turned Ron Weasley, he wouldn't have one. -- Heather (uma) From lipglossusa at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 20:56:14 2001 From: lipglossusa at yahoo.com (lipglossusa) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 20:56:14 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an animagus? In-Reply-To: <9uun25+7ono@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v0j5e+n6hh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31170 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "snozwoffle" wrote: > I was reading book 2 and noticed that Tom Riddle said that > Dumbledore was the transfiguration professor. This made me wonder D > could possibly be an animagus, because if he is interested in > transfiguration, why not? McGonagall, who is the transfiguration > professor is is an animagus. I can't see > Dumbledore being an unregistered animagus, so I decided there was > nothing in my theory. Don't get rid of your theory yet! Remember, Hermione said in PoA that the list she saw is for animagi this (20th) century-- Dumbledore may be on the 19th century list of animagi. If Dumbledore is an animagus, what do you think he turns into? I imagine that he becomes an animal with wings. Also, do you think that his animal appearance appears to age with him, or does he become younger every time he transforms? Marina From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 21:59:20 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 21:59:20 -0000 Subject: Certain rooms (was Re: [HPforGrownups] (unknown) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9v0mro+khm7@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31171 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jenett wrote: > On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, cloud_walkinguk wrote: > > > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > > My guess would be the prefect's bathroom - it sounded very intriguing from > the little bit of description, and like there *should* be something more > about it than has thus far been mentioned. > > -Jenett The bathroom Dumbledore happened to mention 'Hogwarts has more secrets than I know of' - and as a near-joke tells about a bathroom that either opens only (i)during certain time or (ii) if the seeker has full bladder. Prefects bathroom? Why should Gryffindor's bathroom have any more specialty than what Harry noticed in Hufflepuffs' prefect bathroom? Although, special room of your own? Sounds nice. Maybe the room's we looked into in Ch 1 of book 4? Not Hogwarts, though... But I kinda like that extra bathroom (maybe Harry &co. discover it when in need not to be noticed! With Neville's full bladder!?) From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 22:02:26 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:02:26 -0000 Subject: Certain rooms (was Re: [HPforGrownups] (unknown) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9v0n1j+jsqm@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31172 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., Jenett wrote: > On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, cloud_walkinguk wrote: > > > > JKR: Go straight into a certain room, mentioned in book four which has > > certain magical properties Harry hasn't discovered yet! > > > > Anyone got any idea what room this might be from GoF? > > My guess would be the prefect's bathroom - it sounded very intriguing from > the little bit of description, and like there *should* be something more > about it than has thus far been mentioned. > > -Jenett The bathroom Dumbledore happened to mention 'Hogwarts has more secrets than I know of' - and as a near-joke tells about a bathroom that either opens only (i)during certain time or (ii) if the seeker has full bladder. Prefects bathroom? Why should Gryffindor's bathroom have any more specialty than what Harry noticed in Hufflepuffs' prefect bathroom? Although, special room of your own? Sounds nice. Maybe the room's we looked into in Ch 1 of book 4? Not Hogwarts, though... But I kinda like that extra bathroom (maybe Harry &co. discover it when in need not to be noticed! With Neville's full bladder!?) From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 22:19:31 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:19:31 -0000 Subject: Magical knitting In-Reply-To: <14f.54716af.29411682@aol.com> Message-ID: <9v0o1j+91ca@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31173 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/6/2001 6:58:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > I really do think something interesting is going to happen with the Dursley's > sometime soon. I'm a bit grim: They die! Dudley in school and Petunia in parent's night/work/hobby - and Vernon at work! As because: Voldemort knows that no one can get at Harry while he's in the care of his relatives OR at Hogwarts under Dumbledore's nose. He wants Harry dead. What's he to do? Kill off Harry's relatives! From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 22:24:45 2001 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 22:24:45 -0000 Subject: Magical knitting In-Reply-To: <14f.54716af.29411682@aol.com> Message-ID: <9v0obd+tvn6@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31174 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > In a message dated 12/6/2001 6:58:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > I really do think something interesting is going to happen with the Dursley's > sometime soon. I'm a bit grim: They die! Dudley in school and Petunia in parent's night/work/hobby - and Vernon at work! As because: Voldemort knows that no one can get at Harry while he's in the care of his relatives OR at Hogwarts under Dumbledore's nose. He wants Harry dead. What's he to do? Kill off Harry's relatives! From hollydaze at btinternet.com Sun Dec 9 22:59:11 2001 From: hollydaze at btinternet.com (Hollydaze) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:59:11 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hagrid as a teacher References: <9ul0tr+pu26@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <008f01c18105$1e214140$2141073e@j0dhe> No: HPFGUIDX 31175 No names given. > > Do you suppose at sometime after Hargrid's expulsion > > from Hogwarts that Dumbledore took it upon himself to finish > > Hagrids training personallyk albeit in secret and "unofficially"? > If he believed Hagrid innocent(as he was) he would have! That's a > reason for Hagrid's reference and extreme loyalty for Dumbledore! > Another might be Dumbledore saving Hagrid from Voldemort. > And - it's also possible Hagrid's saved Dumbledore from a giant or > two... JK has said that since Hagrid was proved innocent in book two, he has been allowed to us magic (one of the reasons he is now allowed to teach at Hogwarts). However she also said that since he NEVER completed his magical training he is not as competent (if that is the right word) in using magic, nor as advanced as the other teachers. HOLLYDAZE!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 23:16:31 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 23:16:31 -0000 Subject: Dead Dursleys = High Comedy In-Reply-To: <9v0obd+tvn6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v0rcf+kb34@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31176 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "finwitch" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., idouright2 at a... wrote: > > I'm a bit grim: They die! Dudley in school and Petunia in parent's > night/work/hobby - and Vernon at work! > > As because: Voldemort knows that no one can get at Harry while he's > in the care of his relatives OR at Hogwarts under Dumbledore's nose. > He wants Harry dead. What's he to do? Kill off Harry's relatives! Urgh! That's a pleasant scenario. But you could really get sitcomesque with it! Just imagine the implications: with the Dursleys dead, it falls to (horrors!) Severus to look after Harry during the summer holidays. Of course Sirius won't have that, no sir, so he hangs about Hogwarts dodging Dementors and getting into endless arguments with Severus over who is/should really be responsible for Harry. By early July, most of the other teachers run off to enjoy the shore at Brighton just to get some peace and quiet, and Lupin takes a temporary job back at the school assisting Dumbledore with paperwork. Dumbledore refuses to step in, supporting both sides equally and occasionally dragging Harry about on business with him just to get the poor kid out of the line of fire. Lupin follows Dumbledore's lead and also refuses to take sides, to Sirius' astonishment. Between Severus' and Sirius' interpersonal difficulties and constant badmouthing of each other, Severus' hyperactive criticism, and Sirius' overbearing and ostentatious attempts to buy Harry off, Harry begins to wonder whether he was better off with his aunt, uncle and cousin. But the Dursleys are horribly pissed off about being dead, doncha know, and just in time for Harry's birthday they finally arrive in pissed-off-ghostly-style at Hogsmeade to ruin his birthday party at the Three Broomsticks.... From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sun Dec 9 23:36:24 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 23:36:24 -0000 Subject: Crookshanks Cat (filk) Message-ID: <9v0sho+199p@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31177 Crookshanks Cat (PoA, Chap 12-13) (To the tune of Alley Cat) Dedicated to Pippin THE SCENE: Gyffindor Common Area. Enter RON. RON He's from the Menagerie Hermie's Crookshanks Cat Since then that feline fury Tried to catch my rat Scabbers Rat is sick and old Unlike Crookshanks Cat Hermione has oft been told To reign in her cat She spoils him Absolves him Acquits him In spite of his catastrophes That's no way to treat my pet Like that Crookshanks Cat Now it seems my rat was et By that Crookshanks Cat He chomped him And crunched him And munched him Not caring how it rattled me Herm and I no longer speak Due to Crookshanks Cat She won't offer a critique Of his sly combat And that's the sad, sad tale of a blind female And her crooked cat. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From jspotila at yahoo.com Sun Dec 9 23:01:33 2001 From: jspotila at yahoo.com (jspotila) Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 23:01:33 -0000 Subject: Availability of Legal Remedies (was Law, Human Rights, and democracy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9v0qgd+kaae@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31178 Jenett wrote: It's where Fred and George > finally get forced to explain why they're trying to track down Bagman, and > what the whole situation is. > > They go through the whole "We tried this, and we tried that, and we can't > get this to work..." but they don't, as I recall, mention anything formal > (like a civil court system) even to discard it as an option for some other > reason. (like "Mom would find out and she'd be angry we gambled.") > I think there is a very simple explanation why Fred and George don't consider a legal remedy for their problem - they're KIDS and the offender is head of a department at the MOM! Even in the US, where the legal system is supposed to be available to everyone, the disenfranchised or those without power are unaware or unable to seek legal redress of wrongs. As a former lawyer, even in the litigious American climate, I know there are many people who do not or cannot avail themselves of legal remedies and protection. How are Fred and George supposed to find and retain an attorney (assuming a civil court system analogous to the US)? How would a court look at two Hogwarts students, with a reputation for pranks and mischief, trying to sue the head of a MOM department? No, I think their approach is much more realistic, albeit risky - threaten to expose Bagman's misconduct in public. I'm sure Rita Skeeter would have loved that scoop (before Bagman had to flee from the goblins). Cheers, Jennie From theodore_harvey at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 00:39:25 2001 From: theodore_harvey at hotmail.com (theodore_harvey) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:39:25 -0000 Subject: Muggles, David hunting, killing wizards, humanism, House-Elves, Parselmouths In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <9v107t+pbdg@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31179 I think Frank Bryce the gardener is an example of a sympathetic Muggle character. When he is eavesdropping on Voldemort and Wormtail at the beginning of GoF, his shocked reaction shows that he is clearly on a much higher moral plane than the two evil wizards. He also seems to be fairly intelligent. And I felt that we were meant to feel some sorrow at his death. So I don't think JKR lacks sympathy for her Muggle characters. (By the way, this is my first actual post, but I've been "lurking" for awhile. I think it's great that the adult HP fan community is so large and active!) > >The general consensus seems to be wizards good, muggles bad. From magsthomas at yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 01:11:48 2001 From: magsthomas at yahoo.com (Margaret Thomas) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:11:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dumbledore an animagus? In-Reply-To: <1007917135.932.19997.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20011210011148.51341.qmail@web11105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31180 --- HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com wrote: > Message: 9 > Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 16:41:15 -0000 > From: "frantyck" > Subject: Re: Dumbledore an animagus? > > > --- snozwoffle wrote: > > > Also, if Dumbledore *was* an animagus, what type > of > > > animal do you > > > think he would turn into? > > > Jenny. > > > I > rather wonder > whether he might be able to take the form of some > small (flying?) > animal. Could be very useful, and obviously worth > keeping quiet. Possibly a bumble bee or other sort of bee? Am thinking specifically of the derivation / meaning behind the name "Albus Dumbledore." - M. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com From kokobreen at juno.com Mon Dec 10 02:14:37 2001 From: kokobreen at juno.com (christine breen) Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:14:37 -0600 Subject: facetious yellow teeth Message-ID: <20011209.201438.-16766445.0.kokobreen@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31181 <> Of course it's far-fetched--I was being completely facetious when I made that first yellow teeth post! Grasping at straws at some new theory to discuss that hasn't been discussed before. Christine From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Mon Dec 10 03:26:41 2001 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 10 Dec 2001 03:26:41 -0000 Subject: File - VFAQ.htm Message-ID: <1007954801.69100291.19987.m12@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31182 An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Mon Dec 10 03:26:41 2001 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 10 Dec 2001 03:26:41 -0000 Subject: File - netiquette2.txt Message-ID: <1007954801.69100542.19987.m12@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31183 NETIQUETTE TIPS FOR HP for GROWNUPS Harry Potter for Grown Ups is a very high-volume list; so it's important that members observe a few rules to help us all navigate through the ocean of messages. Members, new and old, are requested to observe certain rules of 'netiquette' and good practice, as outlined below. ATTENTION! Please note that we have separate club areas for OT posts, Movie-related discussions and Announcements: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Announcements You will need to join OT Chatter if you want to submit an off-topic message to the group, Movie if you want to discuss the Harry Potter film(s) and Announcements if you have an announcement. When you first join the list, you will be on Moderated status. If it is necessary to reject any of your posts, it will be because they have not taken into account one or more of the rules listed here. It is, therefore, imperative that you familiarise yourself with these Netiquette Tips before joining the discussions. If you need any advice or clarification at any stage, please don't hesitate to contact the Moderators and List Elves at hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com [Moderators exit, stage left, cackling...] IF YOU HAVEN'T POSTED HERE BEFORE... Please read the VFAQ (Very Frequently Asked Questions) document in our Files area before posting to the group. The answers to many burning newbie questions can be found in this document, and it will save time for everyone. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/VFAQ.htm It's also helpful to read a few days' worth of messages before posting your own. You can do this either by "lurking" (reading messages, but not writing them) for a few days, or by going back through the most recent messages (a daunting task, with such an active group). This way, you'll get a "feel" for the group, and you can make sure you're not repeating something that has been posted recently by someone else. If you ask burning questions in your first post, make sure you indicate that extra content in the heading and don't just call it "Hi from a newbie!" USE/NOTE PREFIXES FOR SOME TOPICS SHIP: discussion of ships (real or potential romantic relationships among the characters) Please note that if your ship post doesn't use examples from the books (canon), it belongs on OT-Chatter rather than the main group. FF: discussion of fan fiction or imaginary scenarios. Please note that these discussions belong on OT-Chatter rather than the main group. ADMIN: 'I must once more ask for your attention, while I give out a few notices.' [Dumbledore, GoF, Chap 12] - Important announcements from the Moderators. KEEP THE SUBJECT LINE RELEVANT TO THE CONTENT OF THE POST Message board conversations, like "real life" ones, will often drift from one subject to another. If the subject line does not change to fit the direction of the conversation, it can frustrate the reader. When replying to a message, please take the time to check the subject line and make sure it still matches your post. For example, if the subject line says: "RE: Who's going to die in the next book?" and the topic has segued into a character matchmaking debate (with no mention of death), it's time to change the subject line! Spare a thought for the people who are busy preparing FAQ essays for the club - they have to scan all the messages for relevant content, so it isn't very helpful if your post is headed "Digest #345" or "A question." CLEARLY DISTINGUISH YOUR OPINIONS/THEORIES FROM FACTS If you are expressing an opinion or espousing a pet theory, be sure that the other readers will recognize it as an opinion or theory. Using phrases such as IMO (in my opinion), "I believe," "This is all speculation but I think... ," etc. will make it clear that your statements are not necessarily based on facts from the books (canon). It can be very confusing for everyone if someone puts forth a theory without any qualifying language. KEEP YOUR POSTS ON TOPIC In such a large and active group, it's easy for discussions to go off on a tangent. If a couple of you find something in common other than Harry Potter, wonderful! Getting to know people is, perhaps, the best thing about clubs. But if you find your discussion getting away from the main point of the club, please continue it off-list. BANNED TOPICS The banned discussions on this list fall into three categories: (1) The Holocaust: Discussion of historical parallels is perfectly fine, including historical parallels to WWII in the HP series, but please avoid discussion of the Holocaust specifically. (2) Politics (especially current US & UK politics), not including speculation about Wizarding World politics. (3) Richard Abanes' book "Harry Potter and The Bible". AVOID ONE-LINE AND ULTRA-SHORT POSTS Our message volume is sometimes very high, so one-line posts can push the numbers through the roof. Please take a moment to think about the following guidelines:- - Consider expanding on your point. For example, if you are posing a question about the HP books ("What about so-and-so?"), could you add some thoughts of your own to lead off any discussion? - Consider combining your shorter points/responses with a few others in a multi-topic post, making sure the topic line indicates this. However, if your point is substantive (or just plain lengthy), it is best to give it space on its own to make the thread easier to follow. - Try to avoid "me too!" and "LOL!" posts that have absolutely no other content. Sometimes a brief response is perfectly acceptable; for example, if you are correcting an error someone has made and do not have much else to say (e.g. "You cannot apparate into Hogwarts!") or giving information that you don't want to bury in another message ("The link to that article about Dumbledore's socks is at http://www.anyoldwebsite.com"). TAKE CARE WHEN RESPONDING TO POSTS If you are replying to a message, please indicate the name of the person who wrote the original and include any relevant segments of their post, or a brief summary of their point(s). At the same time, please try to delete any parts of the original post that are not relevant to your point(s), especially if the original was really long! Please avoid putting your reply at the end of a very long quoted segment unless absolutely necessary. In most cases, it will be easy enough to delete some or all of the quoted material. Remember, also, that if you respond in a fresh post rather than using the 'reply' button, your response will not appear in the "replies to this message" in any search. In general, if someone asks a question that has a unique answer, please try to check through the message headers to see if anyone else has responded to it before posting the answer. It's understandable that several people may dash off a response just after the original message, but there should be no need for further posts after that. TAKE THE TIME TO PROOFREAD YOUR POSTS If you're used to forums where speed is important (chat rooms, role playing games, etc.), it's easy to fall out of the habit of proofreading. Here, however, your post will be as relevant in five minutes (or, usually, even in five hours) as it is now. Before hitting the 'send' button, please take a few minutes to look over your post and correct any typos, spelling/punctuation errors, or problems with sentence structure or capitalization. This will make it much easier to read and help in getting across your point. Please avoid using all lower case letters or, worse still, all CAPITAL LETTERS. BE CONSIDERATE OF OTHER MEMBERS' FEELINGS If you disagree with someone's message, no matter how strongly, remember to respect the other person's right to his or her own opinion. If you do wish to refute the post, do so gently, by building up your own case, rather than just knocking down the other person's. And never attack your fellow club members (name calling, personal remarks, etc). Thanks!! >From your Magical Moderators HPforGrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 04:26:03 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:26:03 -0000 Subject: Dead Narrative Sources in lit (PoV) In-Reply-To: <004901c17e5f$ea71bd40$de08f1d5@OSLII> Message-ID: <9v1dgr+ai7e@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31184 EV VY Wrote: > I wouldn't agree here. As Cornflower O'Shea wrote: > << Remember how we spent the first part of PS "aligned" with Uncle Vernon...>> > The first part of the first chapter os PS is definintely written >from Uncle Vernon's PoV. An invisible narrator (whose PoV it would >have been) wouldn't be able to use anything like this: "He put the >receiver back down and stroked his moustache, thinking... no, he >was being stupid . Potter wasn't such an unusual name. > The reader >gets an insight into the character's thoughts, etc. And it's Uncle >Vernon's perspective. But an "invisible narrator" can and does do just that in semi- omniscient third person narratives. "Third person" in that it is always "He/She", never "I", which is important to consider when looking at point of view. i.e. What difference does it make that we get Harry's thoughts, but not through Harry's voice? "Onmiscient" because the "invisible narrator" CAN look into a character's brain, or insert a comment from their particular point of view, though not through their voice. In Uncle Vernon's case, his point of view is clearly parodied, repeated, but not truly "believed" by the narrator (Can I prove that? No I can't!). "Semi" because the author carefully chooses when and where to use omniscient insight, and when to use observational narrative (non-omniscient), to manipulate the effect. Actually it would interesting to break down how exactly the books are constructed in terms of these types of shifts in "alignment". For example, I can't think of any point where we are allowed any access to the thoughts of Snape or Dumbledore, and they are, to my mind, the most mysterious characters. Then again, I can only think of Frank, the townspeople, the Durselys, and Harry, that we do get extra-observational comments on. Does some painfully meticulous fanatic want to make a list of incidents where we do get omniscient insights (i.e. we are told things that simple observation could not reveal, like thoughts, opinions, sensory imput (like Harry's scar burning), etc.)? Anyway, I think it is important to separate semi-omniscient narative from pure point of view, in the first person sense. I really noticed this in the film. There are some jarring difference simply because the movie does not have a narrative voice. In particular scenes like the snake scene and the sorting hat seemed strangely wrong simply because Harry's internal narrative, which comes to us via the semi-omniscient voice, had to be externalized. Here is the lead in to the snake scene from the book: "He wouldn't have been surprised if it had died of boredom itself - no company except stupid people drumming their fingers on the glass trying to disturb it all day long. It was worse than having a cupboard as a bedroom, where the only vistor was Aunt Petunia hammering on the door to get you up - at least he got to visit the rest of the house" (p.25 Candian Raincoast) So here we have a moment when the POV is still third person, but the tone shifts to one that an 11 year old boy would use. It is not Harry speaking, but the narrator shifts into his style of speaking. We get his feelings, his empathy with the snake, without his actually voice. I find this profoundly compelling. The third person narrative is generally more trustworthy, (unless used ironically, like in the case of Uncle Vernon), whereas first-person narration often tends to make us question the speaker, because we know that whoever is speaking is blinded by their own perspective. However in this quote, and throughout the books, we almost get first person, but the narrative remains, technically, third person. Stylistically it is quite a sophisticated way to win us over to Harry side; to develop a strong empathtic bond between the reader and Harry. It is very cleverly written, IMHO... Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 05:30:30 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:30:30 -0000 Subject: The Buzz on Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <9v0gj2+4d8b@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v1h9m+ovha@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31185 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "finwitch" wrote: > > Agreed - as mentioned before, he surprised Harry with the Mirror of Erised, flew to Hogwarts once discovering he had been tricked by a false letter + Dumbledore means bumblebee. So um - I believe it's quite clear that he's a bee animagus. Oh! I like the symbolism of that! The life of bees has been a little fascination of mine, and Dumbledore is one of my favourites. It seems a little iffy, because of the whole Rita is a beetle thing, but it feels right somehow. When I read this I zipped to my search engine to find some info on the symbolism of bees, and aside from the obvious, "diligent and hardworking" stuff I found this: "The bee represents perfect community, and although it is weak in body, it is strong in spirit and wisdom." Hogwarts is the hive, and Dumbledore the Queen? Does this make Hagrid "Keeper of the Bees"? Cheers! - Cornflower O'Shea *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" -Albus Dumbledore (BUZZ?) *~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~*~~~~* ps. Actually, if he really was a bee animagus, would JK have mentioned in an interview that Dumbledore means bumblebee? Not likely. From tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 05:36:31 2001 From: tenpinkpiggies at hotmail.com (cornflower_o_shea) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:36:31 -0000 Subject: Petunia In-Reply-To: <9uo1hu+mo81@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v1hkv+tr33@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31186 Aurora wrote: Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he > hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so quickly, without investigating? Perhaps because her sister went to Hogwarts, so she knows he is not allowed to use magic. -Cornflower O'Shea ps. Maybe socks are just funny. To misquote Freud...sometimes a sock is just a sock. From sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 10 12:23:21 2001 From: sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk (sofie_elisabeth) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:23:21 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulpqg+ri2n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v29fp+gj5d@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31187 My parallels are such: Ron is Sirius. They are both rash and have a bad temper. Although Ron doesn??t always show his intelligence, he is quite clever. They are both fiercely loyal to their friends, but will take it into their own hands to punish ??disloyalty??. Harry is Remus. They are both insecure and almost look for approval from others. But they will take charge of a situation and keep a cool head. They both seems to have more controlled anger and will use it constructively. Harry??s subject seems to be DADA (Lupin teaches it). They are both intelligent. I struggled a little with Hermione but the more I thought the more parallels with James I saw. Hermione is the only one who is confident in her abilities (except for the ??Are you a witch or not??? incident!) and she is the cleverest. She has a sense of adventure and fun. On closer examination of the books she is quite willing to break rules i.e. she opens the door that leads them to Fluffy (using magic in the corridors!) she suggests using the polyjuice potion and steals the ingredients, she uses the time-turner, keeps the fact that Lupin is a werewolf hidden etc. And in her own way she is possibly the bravest, coming to a magical school when she is muggle born and knows nothing of this world and then succeeding. So the only one I couldn??t really find a parallel with is Pettigrew. I don??t think Neville, because he has already shown himself to be far braver than Wormtail. My next thought was Draco, but I have no evidence of that and have possibly been reading too much fanfiction! One question: How involves does everyone think Lily was with the marauders as it seems that she and James married almost straight out of school? Sofie From sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk Mon Dec 10 12:23:45 2001 From: sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk (sofie_elisabeth) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:23:45 -0000 Subject: Current "Marauders" vs. Original Marauders In-Reply-To: <9ulpqg+ri2n@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v29gh+3len@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31188 My parallels are such: Ron is Sirius. They are both rash and have a bad temper. Although Ron doesn??t always show his intelligence, he is quite clever. They are both fiercely loyal to their friends, but will take it into their own hands to punish ??disloyalty??. Harry is Remus. They are both insecure and almost look for approval from others. But they will take charge of a situation and keep a cool head. They both seems to have more controlled anger and will use it constructively. Harry??s subject seems to be DADA (Lupin teaches it). They are both intelligent. I struggled a little with Hermione but the more I thought the more parallels with James I saw. Hermione is the only one who is confident in her abilities (except for the ??Are you a witch or not??? incident!) and she is the cleverest. She has a sense of adventure and fun. On closer examination of the books she is quite willing to break rules i.e. she opens the door that leads them to Fluffy (using magic in the corridors!) she suggests using the polyjuice potion and steals the ingredients, she uses the time-turner, keeps the fact that Lupin is a werewolf hidden etc. And in her own way she is possibly the bravest, coming to a magical school when she is muggle born and knows nothing of this world and then succeeding. So the only one I couldn??t really find a parallel with is Pettigrew. I don??t think Neville, because he has already shown himself to be far braver than Wormtail. My next thought was Draco, but I have no evidence of that and have possibly been reading too much fanfiction! One question: How involves does everyone think Lily was with the marauders as it seems that she and James married almost straight out of school? Sofie From swman19 at yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 06:30:00 2001 From: swman19 at yahoo.com (SWman19) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:30:00 -0000 Subject: Petunia In-Reply-To: <9v1hkv+tr33@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v1kp8+b50r@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31189 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cornflower_o_shea" wrote: > Aurora wrote: > Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he > > hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so > quickly, without investigating? > > Perhaps because her sister went to Hogwarts, so she knows he is not > allowed to use magic. > > -Cornflower O'Shea > > ps. Maybe socks are just funny. To misquote Freud...sometimes a sock > is just a sock. Yeah but if she knew that Harry couldn't use magic, then why does it say they were afraid of him doing some. The first Uncle Veron hears of him not being able to do magic is when he gets the offical letter from the Minestry of Magic Swman19 From rowanxv at yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 07:49:35 2001 From: rowanxv at yahoo.com (rowanxv) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:49:35 -0000 Subject: The Buzz on Dumbledore In-Reply-To: <9v1h9m+ovha@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v1pef+g8nj@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31190 Cornflower O'Shea wrote: > ps. Actually, if he really was a bee animagus, would JK have > mentioned in an interview that Dumbledore means bumblebee? Not > likely. She's been dropping hints in every book so far. Who's to say she didn't drop one during the chat, as well? :) I'm KeL, by the way. I'm new to the discussion group so I'd like to say hello to everyone. From raolin1 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 13:38:07 2001 From: raolin1 at hotmail.com (raolin.rm) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:38:07 -0000 Subject: Hermione's name In-Reply-To: <9urc3b+hg1c@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2drv+eecp@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31191 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "lucky_kari" wrote: > Orestes killed Helen? Since when? No, Orestes killed Achilles's dumb > athletic(:-) son, which would make Orestes, Ron, and the other guy, > Viktor Krum! I like it. > > Eileen > > PS. I hate Viktor Krum. I mean has he considered that Hermione is only > 14? Whoops, you're right, my mistake! Of course, according to the conventional wisdom, Hermione is probably 15 and one of the oldest gals in her class - making the age gap somewhat smaller... Joshua Dyal From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Mon Dec 10 13:50:07 2001 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc2001) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:50:07 -0000 Subject: apologies for cross-posting: "scholarly" writings on HP In-Reply-To: <005101c180ab$ca26fc00$1503000a@Ty> Message-ID: <9v2eif+ve86@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31192 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Andrew Albert J. Ty" wrote: > Hi everyone, > > questions I want to raise with regards to that. > > What I would like to do with this post is to point members to Lee Siegel's > review-essay of the first three books, which may be found at > http://www.thenewrepublic.com/magazines/tnr/112299/siegel112299.html. I need > to reread it again, but I'd like to ask the other members if they know of > other similar essays Alison Lurie's NYRB review of the first three volumes is at: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/264 - CMC From Joanne0012 at aol.com Mon Dec 10 13:54:07 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:54:07 -0000 Subject: Petunia In-Reply-To: <9v1kp8+b50r@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2epv+n9ac@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31193 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "SWman19" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cornflower_o_shea" > wrote: > > Aurora wrote: > > Dudley tattles and it says that Petunia knew he > > > hadn't realy done any magic. How could she know for sure, so > > quickly, without investigating? > > > > Perhaps because her sister went to Hogwarts, so she knows he is not > > allowed to use magic. > Yeah but if she knew that Harry couldn't use magic, then why does it > say they were afraid of him doing some. The first Uncle Veron hears > of him not being able to do magic is when he gets the offical letter > from the Minestry of Magic Certainly, up until Uncle Vernon got that letter, the Dursleys thought that Harry could do magic during summers. Not only did Lily do magic during summers (teacups into toads), but they also believe that Harry (not Dobby) was responsible for the crash of the fancy dessert on the night of the Dursleys' dinner party at the beginning of CoS. From epoch2 at infi.net Mon Dec 10 14:15:50 2001 From: epoch2 at infi.net (zephyr036) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:15:50 -0000 Subject: Petunia In-Reply-To: <9v1hkv+tr33@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2g2m+v3b5@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31194 Well, this is a very interesting argument and I thought I might just toss out a possibility. What are the odds that Petunia is actually a Squib? In Sorcerer's Stone, Petunia is quite pleased to tell Harry about what his mother actually was. Although she only briefly mentions that her parents were pleased to have a witch in the family, there is nothing really said about Harry's family. Is it possible that Harry's Grand parents were magical? Lily was certainly a great witch. Is it possible that Petunia's hatred for her sister and anything magical could be very much like Filch's hatred for students? A squib would certainly become bitter being surrounded by those that can do something that they never could. Furthermore, there is no explanation as to why Harry is safe from Voldemort, as long as he is with the Dursley's. Can a Squib be a secret keeper? Is Petunia actually holding Harry's present whereabouts from Voldemort? Just a thought. From amendels at lynx.neu.edu Mon Dec 10 14:50:57 2001 From: amendels at lynx.neu.edu (auroraalma) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:50:57 -0000 Subject: Petunia In-Reply-To: <9v2g2m+v3b5@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2i4h+ic8t@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31195 "zephyr036" wrote: > Well, this is a very interesting argument and I thought I might > just toss out a possibility. What are the odds that Petunia is > actually a Squib? In Sorcerer's Stone, Petunia is quite pleased to This idea has been kicked around before. I was trying to add a bit of evidence to the theory 'Petunia is a witch with very weak powers (hence no Hogwars for her), which she intentionally tries to supress' theory, which someone else ( I don't remember who) suggested. Some other evidence that has been mentioned is that Aunt Marge's glass shatters while she is insulting Harry's parents. Possibly Petunia did this. Aurora From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 14:51:44 2001 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:51:44 -0000 Subject: Ron & Dumbledore (and Lily's) Hair colour. In-Reply-To: <9v041q+m4ph@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2i60+d0ak@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31196 Apologies if I'm going over old ground - I've been away from the group for a while - but in response to Susan's mesage about Ron and dumbledore being the same person - why do you think that? That's fascinating. Ffi From hulintay at hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 13:39:10 2001 From: hulintay at hotmail.com (hulintay) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:39:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's Birthday Message-ID: <9v2dtu+5jmh@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31197 Hello everyone, I have just joined this Yahoo! Group, and this is my first message. You may have observed from my personal particulars that I am a teenager, but I hope you will not think differently of me because of my age. I have read all released Harry Potter books so far, (including Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them and Quidditch Through The Ages), and I am deeply interested in Harry Potter. I assure you that I will be very mature in all my posts. Now to the topic at hand ? I'm aware that this matter isn't very major, and I hope it hasn't been mentioned before, but it has puzzled me throughout the 4 books. It is to do with Harry's birthday. Firstly, I shall give some examples: in SS, towards the end of chapter 3, Harry is counting down the number of seconds before he turns eleven. (Although the actual time is not mentioned in the book, it is shown as 12.00 midnight in the movie) In PoA, on page 10 of the UK edition, it is mentioned that "it was one o'clock in the morning. Harry's stomach gave a funny jolt. He had been thirteen years old, without realizing it, for a whole hour". This of course suggests that Harry *turns* 13 at exactly 12 midnight. I know, I know this sounds quite trivial, but isn't it strange that Harry *knows* that he was born at 12 midnight? He hardly knows anything about his parents! IMO, I think JK should have wrote these passages in such a way that his birthday would not be represented by a particular hour, but by the day itself. If you don't understand, notice that in the first example, Hagrid bursts in at exactly 12 midnight to give Harry his letter, and since Harry needed to get the letter by the time he was eleven, it suggests that Harry *turned* eleven at exactly 12 midnight. For the second example, it is quite obvious, as it is stated clearly that "he had been thirteen years old, without realizing it, for a whole hour". Please give me your opinions on this matter, I'd really appreciate it. :) hulintay a.k.a. ***Astral?!?Wizard*** From Joanne0012 at aol.com Mon Dec 10 15:09:18 2001 From: Joanne0012 at aol.com (joanne0012) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:09:18 -0000 Subject: Harry's Birthday In-Reply-To: <9v2dtu+5jmh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2j6u+ede9@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31198 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "hulintay" wrote: isn't it strange that > Harry *knows* that he was born at 12 midnight? He hardly knows > anything about his parents! IMO, I think JK should have wrote these > passages in such a way that his birthday would not be represented > by a particular hour, but by the day itself. I think she *did* write as if the whole day was the birthday, not as if Harry knew that he had been born at exactly midnight. It seems to me that Harry considers the whole day of July 31 to be his birthday, and of course that day begins at midnight. This seems to be the most prevalent way of kids' regarding birthdays -- don't most kids get up on their birthday morning, checking to see whether they *feel* a year older? I suspect that very few kids know or care what exact time they were born, even those with constant access to their parents! From farris5 at swbell.net Mon Dec 10 15:23:51 2001 From: farris5 at swbell.net (Russ & Wanda) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:23:51 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia References: <9v2i4h+ic8t@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <000b01c1818e$ac8dd540$0cfcbed0@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 31199 How do we know that Lily and Petunia's parents are not magical folk? I don't remember it ever being specifically mentioned in the books. The only thing I remember about it was Petunia's words that her parents were so thrilled that Lily had magical powers. Perhaps their whole family was magical and Petunia is a squib, hence her bad feelings for all things magical. I just don't recall there being enough information yet to rule out that Lily is from a magically inclined family. Please correct me if I'm wrong though, Wanda ----- Original Message ----- From: auroraalma To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 8:50 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Petunia "zephyr036" wrote: > Well, this is a very interesting argument and I thought I might > just toss out a possibility. What are the odds that Petunia is > actually a Squib? In Sorcerer's Stone, Petunia is quite pleased to This idea has been kicked around before. I was trying to add a bit of evidence to the theory 'Petunia is a witch with very weak powers (hence no Hogwars for her), which she intentionally tries to supress' theory, which someone else ( I don't remember who) suggested. Some other evidence that has been mentioned is that Aunt Marge's glass shatters while she is insulting Harry's parents. Possibly Petunia did this. Aurora [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From heathernmoore at yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 15:16:12 2001 From: heathernmoore at yahoo.com (heathernmoore) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:16:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's Birthday In-Reply-To: <9v2dtu+5jmh@eGroups.com> Message-ID: <9v2jjs+3seu@eGroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 31200 --- In HPforGrownups at y..., "hulintay" wrote: