Crookshanks *is* a Kneazle, was Unknown animagi

[Amanda Geist]

No: HPFGUIDX 42129

> Lilac writes:
>
> > I used to think Crookshanks was, but I've read many theories on the
> interenet that he is
> > actually a Kneazle or part-Kneazle, and I am leaning more toward that.
> The description from
> > Fantastic Beasts says (pg 24-25):
>
> > "...The Kneazle is intelligent, independent, and occasionally
aggressive,
> though if it takes a
> > liking to a witch or wizard, it makes an excellent pet.  The Kneazle has
> an uncanny ability to
> > detect unsavoury or suspicious characters (Me:  Scabbers in POA) and can
> be relied upon
> > to guide its owner safely home if they are lost....Kneazles are
> sufficiently unusual in
> > appearance to attack muggle interest."

Richelle added:

> I think Crookshanks is not a normal cat, whether a kneazle or animagi, I'm
> still not certain.  Perhaps you're right with the "part-Kneazle" theory.
> Because the Fantastic Beast guide says it has "a tail like a lion."
> Crookshanks is described as having a "bottlebrush tail" which doesn't
quite
> remind me of a lion's tail.  The guide also says "Kneazles have up to
eight
> kittens in a littler and can interbreed with cats."  Hmm, how about that?
> So it is possible to produce a half cat-half kneazle creature, which may
> well be Crookshanks.

I now add:

Crookshanks is indeed part-Kneazle. This has been confirmed by JKR in an
interview. I'm not remembering which one, but I do remember listening to it
over and over and over trying to make out through my less-than-sterling net
audio whether she is saying "half" or "part" Kneazle. [*I* thought it was
half, but the consensus of the list was that it was part.] The point is, we
do know that Crookshanks is what you were suspecting.

The interview was shortly after the publication of the schoolbooks, and she
had been discussing how much she'd enjoyed putting them together, since it
was pure creation without having to worry about plot intricacies, and
because she had so much additional information that otherwise readers might
never know. This would seem to confirm what many of us felt on reading the
schoolbooks, that JKR was using them to give us some hints or additional
helpful information (in addition, of course, to raising lots of money for
charity, another worthy cause).

I know that JKR has had inaccuracies in interviews (like James' team
position), but this particular information about Crookshanks doesn't seem to
be the sort of thing that can mutate like that. I think we can trust it. If
I could remember at this hour of the morning where the interview record is,
I'd find it for you, but I am *not* a morning person, my sons are, and I'm
dealing with that personal burden right now.....

I believe the schoolbooks are canon? Interviews, I think, technically
aren't, but they *are* JKR information. However, the more-than-foot-stomper
clues in the description of Kneazles, coupled with her bald confirmation of
Crookshanks, doesn't seem open to argument, at least not to me.

--Amanda