OOP: Bloodlines, Thestrals, Pensieves, and Apparations (possible spoilers)

[iadoreharry]

No: HPFGUIDX 66049

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Boggess Ramon 
<boggles at e...> wrote:
> >
> >That bit about Harry being a half-blood doesn't really sit well 
with me.  IMO
> >Harry has more wizarding blood than LV simply because, even 
though Lily was
> >muggle-born she was a witch.  Only one of LV's parents, his 
mother, possessed
> >wizarding blood.  His father was pure muggle.
> 
> Two thoughts:
> 
> First, Harry and Tom have the same number of Muggle grandparents: 
two 
> each.  That Harry's mother was a sport doesn't change that.  So 
it's 
> not obvious that this means Harry should be considered something 
> other than a half-blood - half his heritage is from wizardly 
stock, 
> and half is from Muggles.  Moreover, there are suggestions (in 
> particular, Ernie Macmillan's protestation that he can trace his 
> family back for nine generations of wizards in Ch. 11 of CoS) that 
> "half-blood" doesn't have to be literal - a wizard with only one 
> Muggle great-grandparent might still be considered a half-blood.  
I 
> rather suspect the Malfoys hold to the "one-drop rule" - if you 
have 
> any traceable Muggle ancestry at all, you're not a pureblood.
> 
> Secondly, why does it matter?  The whole point of the series is 
that 
> being half-blood, pureblood, or Muggle-born simply doesn't 
signify, 
> that being a pureblood is not "better" than either of the other 
two 
> conditions.  It always confuses me when I hear fans essentially 
> trying to use the Death Eater's ideology to build up Harry 
somehow! 
> It also seems to demean the importance of the Trio - a pureblood 
> (Ron), a half-blood (Harry), and a full Muggle-born (Hermione), 
all 
> working together.  (I am a little disappointed that the remainder 
of 
> the D.A. that goes to the Ministry with them is skewed pureblood - 
> both Ginny and Neville are, and we don't know what Luna's ancestry 
> is.  On the other hand, both the Creeveys are Muggle-born, and 
they 
> were certainly part of the D.A. as well.)

I find it interesting that none of the deatheaters seem to care that 
Tom/LV is only a half wizard except that when Harry brings that up 
to Bellatrix, she gets furious.  It seems to undermine their whole 
agenda if their leader is exactly the thing they're against!

 At 10:32 AM +0000 6/29/03, medeia_no wrote:
> >Except if Harry can see thestrals because of having witnessed
> >Cedric's death, why didn't he see them when leaving school last 
term?
> 
> The carriages are only mentioned very briefly at the end of GoF, 
and 
> it's Hermione who is mentioned looking at them.  Perhaps seeing a 
> Thestral is a gradual process - if Harry had paid close attention 
> then, he might have seen a shadow, a flicker, but it took a summer 
of 
> brooding and having it sink in that he had truly witnessed a death 
> for them to become fully visible.  After all, Harry is still in 
> denial about Sirius's death at the end of OoP - perhaps you have 
to 
> not only have seen it and understood it, but accepted it.
> 
> Speaking of which, I think Harry's thoughts in Ch. 14 of GoF make 
it 
> clear that Harry has no visual memories of his parents' deaths 
other 
> than the green flash itself; he has to imagine what the scene 
would 
> have looked like.  He only remembers voices, and those only 
because 
> the Dementors brought them up.  If he had any other visual 
memories, 
> I suspect he would have relived those under the Dementors as well, 
so 
> I think we can assume that he didn't actually see his mother die.  
I 
> don't think the books make it clear why not, though - perhaps 
we'll 
> find out later (a darkening hex on the room?  Wormtail got in the 
> way?), or perhaps JKR doesn't consider it important.

Also technically, in the Sorcerers Stone, Harry killed Quirell by 
touching him with his hands. Either way- he certainly saw Quirell 
die so why couldn't he see the thestrals his second year?


No thoughts on pensieve or apparition