PI - Snape task - SHIP Skeeter - Ginny

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 15321

Catherine wrote:

>The only people who came out of V's wand were people who were
>killed.  V had just previously used his wand to torture Harry and one
>of the Death Eaters, and this didn't come out during the Priori
>Incantatum, therefore it seems that this has the effect of creating
>temporary ghosts of people killed and things which no longer exist
>which can be recreated (such as the Dark Mark during the Quidditch
>World Cup).  (Please don't tell me about the recreation of the Dark
>Mark, I can't explain that yet).

I think Dumbledore's expression "echoes" explains it well.  

The Cruciatus does come out—it echoes as faint repetitions of the 
victim's screams; 

the conjuring of solid objects (Wormtail's hand) echoes as faint, 
quickly dispersing images of the objects; 

the murder of a person echoes as the faint image, visual and aural 
and ____ (I'm looking for an adjective for "personality"), of the 
person; 

and the conjuring of whatever the Dark Mark is (some kind of pattern 
of light, like fireworks if they could hang in the sky for an hour?) 
echoes as a smaller, briefer, fainter version.

Amanda wrote, in yet another post filled with the kind of deliciously 
picayune detail that ought to win her the Professor Binns Memorial 
Lexicon Award:

>it's pretty clear that Wormtail was the wielder for
>Cedric, Frank, and Bertha, and they showed up for Voldemort's wand.

I agree with your point, but will nitpick on Frank; I think V killed 
him.  He does have hands.  But as much as I would like to demonstrate 
that I, too, need a life, I don't have GoF handy so I can't cite 
chapter 1 for proof.

Damn, Amanda!  I wrote this whole thing about Snape's telling 
Voldemort that he was the one who got James to switch Secret-Keepers—
I was so proud of myself—I'd never thought of that before . . . and 
then I read your post.  You are too thorough! 

This part is still relevant in response to Gwen and then your 
suggestion:

Now, Sirius, or was it Remus, says in the Shrieking Shack that Peter 
is not in good with the Dark Lord & followers because Voldemort did 
go after the Potters on his information and met his downfall there.  
(Perhaps Snape would be in the same shape for the same reason.  
However, after subjecting Our Greasy-Haired Hero to a few Cruciatuses 
(Cruciati?) for his edification, V may well let that go.  Snape 
didn't foresee that Harry would cause V's downfall any more than 
Peter did, but neither did V.  It was apparently totally astonishing 
to everyone.  (I always thought that if Sirius was right, it was 
pretty tough on Peter.  He was a good little traitor and gave his 
Master the information he wanted—how was he to know it would 
backfire?)

Penny re: JKR on "the answer is in GoF":

>Her answer was quite ambiguous in my mind.

*Waving from over on the Good Ship R/H*  I couldn't agree more.  That 
was definitely Jo being diabolically ambiguous, IMO.

Just to keep things from getting too cozy between the ships, though:

Penny also wrote:

>Skeeter also apparently perceives that there's a possible
>angle there.  If Hermione's feelings for Ron were really all that
>obvious, why would Skeeter think that her articles about H & H would
>touch a nerve?  Skeeter clearly has an agenda .... if there was truly
>nothing there, then would she have used that particular angle or 
tried
>to find something else to get at Harry?

I agree with some H/H hints (Krum's jealousy being the most 
convincing one), but this one doesn't do it for me.  Skeeter's agenda 
is to get a cute story and/or make trouble, first for Harry, then for 
Hagrid, then for Hermione.  Needless to say, she couldn't care less 
whether she has a scrap of evidence for any of it.  She first writes 
about the supposed H/H romance because she is trying to get copy on 
*Harry* and *Harry* hangs around with a *girl* all the time (thanks 
very much, Colin, for feeding her that little tidbit).  Even if Ron 
and Hermione were snogging in the corridors, Rita might still say 
Hermione was Harry's girlfriend, because she is writing about 
*Harry.*  At that point in the book, Rita is not trying to "touch a 
nerve" with Hermione—Hermione is just a useful pawn in Rita's quest 
for Potter Column Inches.

When, later, she does have it in for Hermione, she already has the 
H/H fiction going, so naturally, she continues it in the vein that 
Hermione is stomping on Poor Tragic Harry's heart.  I don't see any 
reason to think Rita has even the slightest idea either one of them 
might actually be interested in the other.

>What else do we really know about Ginny?

Not much, but I'll add a couple of things: the Yule-Ball-date 
conversation adds some complexity to her relationship with Ron, as 
well as telling us a bit about her relationship with Hermione.  Ron 
will confide in her, and she'll comfort him, when he's had a bad 
experience (she seems to be prepared to miss dinner on his account, 
until he ticks her off); if he irritates her, she'll cut him down--
Harry, too, for that matter; she is in Hermione's confidence, as 
Catherine said (and very likely the only person who is, given that 
Parvati, Lavender, and Harry aren't), and has Hermione-like gumption 
when it comes to keeping secrets (won't tell them who H's date is). 
What I get from this scene is that Ginny sees herself and Ron as 
equals, that she is the closest female friend Hermione has, and that 
although she may have a killer crush on Harry, she isn't going to be 
Miss SweetiePie around him—if she's annoyed at him she'll let him 
have it.  We don't know much about her, but the bits we see in GoF 
tell us that she's tough.

I also get a bit about Ginny from her "you're so old-fashioned, Mom"—
standard 13-year-old behavior, but it tell us *something,* as does 
the fact that she likes Bill's long hair and earring.

In any case, you can't say she's the least developed Weasley.  Look 
at Bill.

Amy Z

P.S. Dont'cha love the way all us Americans are now using "snog" on a 
regular basis?  That's what fanfic will do to you; I never even heard 
the word until three months ago.  No, that's not true—I heard Dawn 
French use it on The Vicar of Dibley and I thought it might 
mean "have sex."