Some Questions = Theories Wanted

[Laura]

No: HPFGUIDX 47512

Let's see...I'll try to not mention the excellent points everyone 
else has already made....but this was a great post, very intriguing 
questions.


"evenflow200214" <daniel.brent at c...> wrote:

> 1) How would Ron have explained to the rest of the Weasley's about 
the disappearence of Scabbers and aquiring Pig? We can see that they 
do not know that Sirius is innocent in GoF and Ron supposedly has no 
money... How would he explain Pig? > 

Well, I can't avoid it here, someone else already explained it away 
for me.  My opinion would be that everyone already thought he had 
been eaten by Crookshanks...so unless Ron decided to say "oh, by the 
way Mum, that night I was dragged into Hogsmeade by a dog who turned 
out to be a convincted criminal and followed by a werewolf, I found 
out that my pet rat wasn't actually wasn't dead, would you believe he 
was a DE who was responsible for the deaths of my best friend's 
parents?" there really wouldn't be too much to explain. =)

And Pig could very well be a present form Harry or Hermione.

> 2)The Weasley's have a clock that tells each of them where each 
member of the family is, home, work etc... Why then, during 
<snip..stuff about the Weasleys being in mortal peril> Why doesn't 
the clock tell the Weasely's that they are in "mortal 
danger"? >
 
My best guess would simply be that they weren't paying attention.  I 
also particularly like the idea that the Fred/George duo either broke 
the "mortal peril" function of the clock or set it off so many times 
that no one cares anymore. =)

> 3) Where is the proof that Crouch attacked the Longbottoms? Sorry 
to reiterate it but it has not been proven that he is guilty...>

Sorry, can't help out here...my memory fails me, I don't remember the 
exact details of the plot development.

Of course, it's *entirely* possible that his innocence/guilt has 
nothing to do with the plot.  
 
But that's no fun. =)

>4) How was Sirius allowed a flying motorbike and why did Dumbledore 
not react at Privet Drive? As far as he knows, Sirius is responsible 
yet he lets what Hagrid says about Sirius giving him the motorbike go 
over his head and doesn't even stop Hagrid when he says he wants to 
take the bike back to Sirius? Is this Dumbledore being lacklustre or 
something else?>

Now this interesting.  Perhaps certain laws regarding Muggle objects 
were not in effect then?  Or maybe, like Arthur Weasley, Sirius 
enchanted the motorcycle "without the intention of flying it" and 
used it in this instance, seeing it as an emergancy.  This seems 
highly unlikely, however.  Why would Sirius have a Muggle objet like 
a motorcycle and the intent to enchant it to fly? (theory, 
anyone? ::wink::)  My best guess would be that there were no laws 
against it at the time.  Of course, that is pure speculation.

As for Dumbledore...firstly, I'm relatively certain that the Muggle 
murders had not been committed yet.  However, IIRC, only Lily, James, 
Sirius, and Peter knew that Sirius was NOT the Potter's Secret-
Keeper.  So when the Potters were attacked, Dumbledore would have 
thought that Sirius had betrayed them.  Or did Dumbledore know about 
the switch?

> 5) How did Sirius know where to find Peter after the Potter's 
deaths? He seems to track him down a little too easily... Did Peter 
plan that Sirius find him in that particular street? And was it part 
of his and Voldemort's original plan, to pretend to blow himself up, 
thus framing Sirius for three murders?>

My best guess would be that they found each other because they had 
been such close friends.  I don't know if Peter planned to meet 
Sirius in a specific spot, but I do believe he had his escape 
planned.  We know from canon that Peter was not very bright, so I 
find it doubtful that he would come up with the clever "cutting-off-
the-finger-and-transforming" scheme on the spot.  I doubt this was 
part of Voldemort's plan, why would he care about Sirius?  Besides, 
the DEs control people through fear, they'd *want* to take credit for 
12 murders in broad daylight.  This seems to me just a case of a 
good-for-nothing-only-looking-out-for-himself *rat* saving his own 
*tail*.

>6) How do the Paintings exist? Were they people who chose to become 
paintings? Are the in the control of the artist that drew them?>

Perhaps the paints used in them work in a similar manner of the 
potion that magical photographs are developed in.  I have a hunch 
(based *kinda* on canon) that magical photographs, if not paintings, 
capture a person's mood at the time the picture was taken.  For 
example, the photo album of Harry's parents show them smiling and 
waving, and Sirius is shown laughing and having fun.  However, we do 
know that Sirius has something of a short temper and a rough, 
somewhat ill-natured side (i.e. luring Snape into the path of 
Lupin).  My best evidence for this theory is in CoS, when Colin takes 
the photograph of Lockhart and Harry - Harry notices that his "photo 
self" was trying very hard by to resist being pulled into the picture 
by Lockhart.  Surely this shows his mood at the time (embarrassment, 
annoyance at Lockhart's interference) and not his normal, friendly 
nature.

>7) Will Harry and Cho get together, in your opinions?>

Nope.  Not anytime soon, anyway.  Someone else mentioned that he was 
Harry's first crush.  First crushes don't mean much.  Besides, the 
poor girl's boyfriend was just killed by the darkest wizard of all 
time.  Talk about rebound, I don't think she's looking for someone 
new just yet, or will be for awhile.  I do have a hunch that she'll 
become more central to the plot, perhaps because of the Cedric 
connection.

>8) Why did Snape leave Voldemort and join him in the first place, in 
your opinions?>

Snape is a very Slytherin-like character.  He's nasty and vicious and 
determined, I think he was lured into the DE circle because of these 
characteristics.  As for why he left...I'd say it would have to be 
something BIG.  Not just "oh, he suddenly realized that the DE's were 
evil."  I'm leaning towards a personal conflict with Voldemort.  And 
don't forget, there has to be something that happens that gains him 
Dumbledore's trust, and I doubt "I realized that they're not nice" is 
going to cut it with Dumbledore.

>9)Why did Tom become Voldemort? Was there a trigger do you think?>

I think it actually began as something very normal and innocent.  He 
found out that his father left his mother because she was a witch.  
Obviously his father would also be ashamed/embarrassed of him 
(Voldemort) because he also had magical abilites.  So he naturally 
had a strong dislike for his father.  The fact that his father was a 
Muggle simply allowed him to use all Muggles as a scapegoat.  Then he 
finds out about Salazaar Slytherin and his "kill all mudbloods" 
theme, and it's all Dark Arts and downhill from there.

> 10) Is Fudge merely corrupt, a good man at heart, or evil? And to 
what degree?>

Fudge is an idiot.  Evil, I'm not sure.  Possibly.  But my opinion is 
that he's just a complete moron who lets himself be controlled and 
maniplulated in order to gain respect.  I expect he may be a good man 
at heart, because he seems rather friendly; but my opinion is that 
he's a complete ditz with the total inability to handle his poisition 
as MoM.

/end of Laura's random babbling/

-Laura