Omnioculars - spells - Lily - gender - virginity- S.P.E.W. - Appearance

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 33480

Can you tell I'm catching up?

blenberry wrote:

>Having just learned the exchange rate for galleons, it struck me that the 
>Omnioculars at the World Cup, at ten galleons each, were the equivalent of 
>$70... pricey! (but supposedly a "bargain").  And Harry forks over three 
>times that much.  I must say, I'm shocked... I would've thought Omnioculars 
>would be in the $15-25 range.

He says that Ron shouldn't expect a Christmas present for about ten years.  
I know he's trying to alleviate Ron's discomfort, and that their typical 
gifts for each other are pretty inexpensive (candy, Dungbombs, the Chudley 
Cannons hat), but it seems as if Omnioculars are a fairly lavish gift.

Ben wrote:

>I was wondering where spells come
>from.  Is there something intrinsic about the word "Accio" embedded into 
>the
>magical fabric of the universe that causes things to be brought to the
>speaker (imagine the poor prehistoric wizard who discovers this as he
>sneezes, his wand inadvertently pointing at a woolly mammoth).  Or perhaps,
>are the spells created somehow (wizard R&D) and magically assigned a magic
>word upon their creation.  Or something else entirely?  Any ideas?

Ooh, I wonder!  Care to spin out these theories some more for us?  I love 
nature of magic stuff...

Jewish mysticism puts a heavy emphasis on the power of words in themselves 
(letters, also).  The word is more than just a summary of what you're trying 
to do; it has a unique power.

Susanna wrote:

>Anyway, I've always had the feeling (and it's no more than just some 
>gut-feeling) that Lily was
>*not* a nice person, at least not in her school days and maybe not even 
>afterwards. Being
>capable of dying for your own child doesn't automatically make you a nice 
>person.

Very good point.

The only testimony we have about Lily's character besides Petunia's is 
Hagrid's, who says she and James were superlatively nice.  What you think 
about Hagrid's judgment of such things is up to you . . .

Pippin made me ROTFL with this:

>hello, Mary Sue, goodbye art.

I hear a filk striving to be born!

Re: gender balance, female characters, etc., I've waxed eloquent on this 
before so y'all can search the archives if you're dying to know my opinion; 
I'll spare those who have already read it a repeat.  I would suggest a 
simple test, however.  Close your eyes and imagine that all of the male 
characters are female and all of the female characters are male.  
Dumbledore, Snape, Neville, etc. etc.--female.  Hermione, Winky, the 
stunning Irish Chasers, etc. etc.--male.   How does it look?  Do the male 
characters have equal prominence with the female?  Do they seem as 
well-developed (as characters) and worthy of respect (as people)?  (I'll 
permit a correction for the tendency, which I mentioned in my previous posts 
on the subject, for us to see female characters as dominant even when they 
take up well under 50% of the space.)

tex23236 wrote:

>There's a lot of tradition about magic powers and virginity.

Is it just me, or is JKR slyly informing us about Professor Grubbly-Plank's 
sexual history when she has Lavender say about the unicorn, "How did she get 
it?  They're supposed to be really hard to catch!"  (Medieval tradition had 
it that only a female virgin could tame a unicorn.)

Red XIV wrote:

>Ron certainly seemed that way; he was openly disdainful of S.P.E.W.
>Harry, on the other hand, seemed to have no problem with it; he
>didn't share Hermione's passion for house-elf rights, but he wasn't
>against her on the subject either.

He was on one occasion:

  "You know, maybe I should try and get some of the villagers involved in 
S.P.E.W.," Hermione said thoughtfully, looking around the pub.
  "Yeah, right," said Harry.  He took a swig of Butterbeer under his Cloak.  
"Hermione, when are you going to give up on this S.P.E.W. stuff?"

This is the moment I like Harry least.  I forgive him because he's in a 
really bad state at the time, and he does at least call it S.P.E.W., but 
he's so dismissive and rude I want to slap him.

Ana wrote re: Lupin:

>He is the only main character about whose, say, facial features  JKR writes 
>nothing. We know a lot about appearance of others, especially Dumbledore 
>and Snape, whose looks are described to the smallest detail.
>Why not Lupin?

Perhaps she is allowing our imaginations their maximum range . . . <g>

I don't actually think the difference is that striking.  Some main 
characters get quite a detailed description, e.g. with Dumbledore we know 
the color of his eyes, the shape of his nose, the style of his glasses, his 
height and build, etc.  His clothes are described at various times as well.  
Then there's Draco, about whom we know only that he has a pale, pointed face 
and cold gray eyes; we finally learn his hair color midway through PA.  (I 
think many of us filled in that he had light hair because of the repetition 
of "pale," just as, as Marianne pointed out, we envision Sirius with black 
hair--BTW, I think we get that from "Black" as well as from the Grim.  I 
think of Sirius as having dark eyes even though his Animagus form has light 
eyes...hmm.)

Many writers seem to think that readers need a detailed physical description 
of a character in order to be able to picture him/her.  This is clearly not 
the case, as JKR demonstrates with her much subtler way of evoking character 
and appearance.

Amy Z
who knows exactly what Lupin looks like

-----------------------------------------------------
[Quidditch] is, of course, an entirely fictional
sport and nobody really plays it.  May I also take
this opportunity to wish Puddlemere United the best
of luck next season.
              -Foreword, Quidditch Through the Ages
-----------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com