Opinions on Ten Big Mysteries

[caliburncy at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 26303

I'm finding less time to post here than I had a while ago so I'm not 
getting to write a lot of the things I'd like.  But I figured I'd go 
ahead and cash in my opinion on this quickly (or perhaps not so 
quickly).

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., justanopinion2001 at h... wrote:
> 1.  Is Snape a vampire, half-vampire, or just a wizard?

Just a wizard.  I believe all the vampiric-sounding descriptions are 
just characterization and I believe the reason they are so often 
recurring is because pretty much the majority of JKR's character 
descriptions are recurring, if you think about it.  She seems to 
paraphrase her descriptions from previous novels in each new novel to 
bring readers that haven't read the prequels up to speed.  And she 
does this repetion of certain phrases for several characters, not just 
Snape.  So the fact that she mentions in pretty much every book the 
bat-like quality of Snape may not be any more significant than any 
other repeated descriptions.  But that's just my take.  I suppose it 
could be something more.

> 2.  Among Snape, Bagman, Karkarov and Fudge, who are Death Eaters, 
> and which DE is too cowardly to return and which DE has left 
> forever?

Karkaroff is too cowardly to return and Snape has left forever.  I 
have yet to be truly convinced that this point is particularly 
debatable at all--though I may be eating my words later on, because 
for me to say this is to not maintain my normal stance of never making 
any assumptions.

I don't think Bagman is a DE and all the suspicion cast upon him seems 
to have been intended solely for that book, not to carry on to future 
books.  After all, the point of that from a foreshadowing point of 
view was to cast suspicion on him as the loyal servant instead of 
Moody/Crouch, Jr.  Don't imagine Fudge will turn out to be a DE 
either, just a blinded politician.  Someone mentioned a quote (which I 
forget the exact wording of) that you shouldn't assume evil intentions 
where stupidity is sufficient explanation.

> 3.  In PoA, was Lupin simply sleeping on the train, or did 
> Dumbledore ask him to take the train to protect Harry?

He took the train perhaps because he's either too poor or too weak 
(what time of the month was it at?--I don't remember) to manage any 
other form of transportation to Hogwarts.  I'm pretty sure he really 
was sleeping (again this could be explained if he was in a weakened, 
near-time-for-transformation state).

But I don't think his lack of responses to the comments made by the 
trio about him are proper evidence that he was sleeping.  We see later 
that he is generally unaffected or at least unresponsive to insults.  
However, I *do* think his sleeping is possible evidence that he's not 
there to protect Harry, because I don't see what end it serves for him 
to feign sleep in that instance (he could accomplish this just as 
effectively without the ruse--unless he was baiting someone, which I 
doubt) and it certainly wouldn't be like him to sleep on the job.

> 4.  How many students are at Hogwarts?

I'm willing to accept 1000, because JKR has confirmed it, but contend 
that the evidence is rather contradictory.  But of course that means 
it is contradictory for lower numbers too, which is why this is an 
unsolvable math problem, IMHO.

> 5.  Does Snape really want the DADA job?

No, no, and again, no.  I'm fairly confident that this will be later 
exposed as untrue somehow.  JKR is rather pointed each time that it is 
a rumor among the students, but she also tries to get us to assume 
it's true anyway.  Always use CONSTANT VIGILANCE against these hasty 
assumptions.  If Snape wanted really this job, why does Hagrid say 
that the only reason they hired Lockhart was that there was nobody 
else willing to take the position?  So, anyway, what's the point of 
this rumor then?  You could argue it was just characterization to cast 
suspicion on him in the first book.  But then why continue bringing it 
up in later books when it's not really necessary as characterization 
after that?  That's why I imagine this will become important later.

> 6.  Does Trelawney have any predictive powers aside from the two 
> correct predictions Dumbledore acknowledges?

As I've said in the past, I believe Trelawney is a True Seer who does 
not realize that she is one and therefore acts like a fraud the rest 
of the time (I think I said this a little better the first time).  She 
therefore has the two correct predictions mentioned by Dumbledore, but 
the rest are not true, or at least they are only true by coincidence 
and not actual invoking of her seer abilities.

> 7.  In GoF, why is Wormtail performing magic with Voldemort's wand, 
> and does Wormtail still have his own wand?

I imagine this whole thing is merely an inconsistency and have never 
really explored it in depth as a result.

> 8.  Are you convinced that you cannot apparate on the Hogwarts 
> grounds, or is this a red herring?

I believe that, just as Hermione says, there are protections on the 
Hogwarts grounds to prevent apparition.  However, I believe that no 
defense is impenetrable.  Now realize, this may never become a plot 
point, but either way I maintain the statement's truth in a general 
sense: no defense is impenetrable.

> 9.  Why don't Fred, George or Harry see or notice Pettigrew on the 
> Marauder's Map?

I believe we know too little about exactly how the map functions to 
effectively argue this.  It's possible the map shows everyone and is 
therefore so cluttered that it's easy to miss people.  It's possible 
the map only shows people that are relevant (or as someone recently 
put it, the people that the viewer wants to see).  And it's possible 
(my favorite explanation--kudos to whoever first came up with it) that 
MWPP designed the map to not display themselves unless another member 
of MWPP activated it, which is why only Lupin can see Peter, but later 
on Snape is still able to see Lupin (since Lupin never closed it, it 
was still subject to his activation).  As for why it doesn't show 
Harry and Hermione time-travelling . . . well, you try writing a 
time-travelling plot that doesn't have holes, really now.  Actually, 
again we know too little about how the map works to say for certain.  
For all we know, it simply can't handle identifying matter that is 
displaced in space-time.  It's a pretty amazing device, especially for 
something that was created by students, but it must have its 
limitations like anything.

We don't get explanations of these things, because there's no place to 
put them.  As a writer, sometimes you notice small holes and just let 
them slide because there's no appropriate place to interrupt and 
include an explanation of why they're not really holes.  But if these 
were errors that JKR failed to notice (as is quite possible), then it 
would be cute of JKR to take one of our explanations and include them 
in a reference to the Marauder's Map for an HP Encyclopedia, hopefully 
to be published after all the books are written (pretty please?).

> 10.  In what order and by whom are James, Lily and Harry attacked?

In the order of James, then Lily, then Harry as all the (corrected) 
evidence indicates and (because I have been given no reason to believe 
otherwise) by Lord Voldemort himself, though Pettigrew may have been 
present and is quite possibly the one who blew up the house unless 
Voldemort blew it up before attacking Harry for some unfathomable 
reason (evildoer's license).

-Luke